1
00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:08,680 --> 00:00:10,680
Speaker 2: As part of my plan to secure the border, on

3
00:00:10,760 --> 00:00:13,760
Speaker 2: day one my new term in office, I will sign

4
00:00:13,800 --> 00:00:17,960
Speaker 2: an executive order making clear to federal agencies that, under

5
00:00:18,000 --> 00:00:22,599
Speaker 2: the correct interpretation of the law going forward, the future

6
00:00:22,680 --> 00:00:27,120
Speaker 2: children of illegal aliens will not receive automatic US citizenship.

7
00:00:27,360 --> 00:00:31,920
Speaker 3: President elect Donald Trump has promised to end birthright citizenship

8
00:00:32,240 --> 00:00:35,640
Speaker 3: as soon as he gets into office. The policy means

9
00:00:35,680 --> 00:00:39,760
Speaker 3: that anyone born in the United States automatically becomes an

10
00:00:39,760 --> 00:00:44,080
Speaker 3: American citizen, even if they're born to someone who's here illegally.

11
00:00:44,520 --> 00:00:48,960
Speaker 3: The leading Supreme Court case on birthright citizenship dates back

12
00:00:49,000 --> 00:00:52,599
Speaker 3: to eighteen ninety eight, and any attempt to get rid

13
00:00:52,680 --> 00:00:56,600
Speaker 3: of it will certainly face legal challenges. Joining me is

14
00:00:56,600 --> 00:01:00,319
Speaker 3: immigration law expert Leon Fresco, a partner at Holliday Night.

15
00:01:00,760 --> 00:01:03,160
Speaker 3: Leon give us a little bit of the history of

16
00:01:03,240 --> 00:01:04,600
Speaker 3: birthright citizenship.

17
00:01:05,200 --> 00:01:08,959
Speaker 1: Well. Birthright citizenship is basically a product of the Civil

18
00:01:09,000 --> 00:01:12,920
Speaker 1: War and the end of Slavery Amendments, the thirteen fourteen

19
00:01:12,959 --> 00:01:16,400
Speaker 1: to fifteenth amendments that were enacted to end slavery, and

20
00:01:16,480 --> 00:01:19,840
Speaker 1: under the fourteenth Amendment, what it said was that anyone

21
00:01:19,959 --> 00:01:23,240
Speaker 1: born in the United States that was within the jurisdiction

22
00:01:23,319 --> 00:01:25,080
Speaker 1: of the United States, and that's going to be the

23
00:01:25,160 --> 00:01:28,399
Speaker 1: key point, is a citizen. And so this had nothing

24
00:01:28,440 --> 00:01:31,200
Speaker 1: to do with anything related to immigration. It was just

25
00:01:31,240 --> 00:01:34,679
Speaker 1: to say you couldn't have people born here who were

26
00:01:34,720 --> 00:01:37,760
Speaker 1: not citizens because that was sort of the way of

27
00:01:37,880 --> 00:01:40,039
Speaker 1: the world at that time, which is, you had slaves

28
00:01:40,040 --> 00:01:42,720
Speaker 1: and you had people who were not slaves, and to

29
00:01:42,920 --> 00:01:45,160
Speaker 1: end that you had to say people who were born

30
00:01:45,240 --> 00:01:49,320
Speaker 1: here had the full right of citizenship. And so that

31
00:01:49,520 --> 00:01:52,000
Speaker 1: was the way it was written to end slavery. Now,

32
00:01:52,080 --> 00:01:56,000
Speaker 1: what that translates to for the purposes of post the

33
00:01:56,120 --> 00:01:58,680
Speaker 1: enactment of the fourteenth Amendment and where we are today

34
00:01:59,240 --> 00:02:02,360
Speaker 1: is that any person born in the United States is

35
00:02:02,400 --> 00:02:06,960
Speaker 1: a citizen. So that can literally mean that if someone

36
00:02:07,080 --> 00:02:09,680
Speaker 1: was here on a tourist visa and they had to

37
00:02:09,680 --> 00:02:11,880
Speaker 1: go to the hospital and then the baby was delivered

38
00:02:11,880 --> 00:02:14,720
Speaker 1: at that moment, that baby would be a US citizen,

39
00:02:14,800 --> 00:02:17,840
Speaker 1: even if they only spent one day in the United States.

40
00:02:17,919 --> 00:02:20,520
Speaker 1: As long as they can get the recording of the

41
00:02:20,560 --> 00:02:23,760
Speaker 1: birth in the United States, that baby would be entitled

42
00:02:23,760 --> 00:02:27,639
Speaker 1: to US citizenship, which also means that when that baby

43
00:02:27,720 --> 00:02:31,320
Speaker 1: turns twenty one years old, they could actually petition for

44
00:02:31,360 --> 00:02:33,800
Speaker 1: a green card for the parents who were here on

45
00:02:33,840 --> 00:02:35,720
Speaker 1: a tourist visa as well.

46
00:02:36,280 --> 00:02:40,280
Speaker 3: So that language of the Fourteenth Amendment quote all persons

47
00:02:40,320 --> 00:02:44,280
Speaker 3: born or naturalized in the United States and subject to

48
00:02:44,320 --> 00:02:49,200
Speaker 3: the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, And

49
00:02:49,440 --> 00:02:54,919
Speaker 3: some proponents of immigration restrictions have argued that those words

50
00:02:54,960 --> 00:03:00,200
Speaker 3: subject to the jurisdiction thereof in the fourteenth Amendment allow

51
00:03:00,440 --> 00:03:05,840
Speaker 3: the US to deny citizenship to babies born to those

52
00:03:05,880 --> 00:03:07,080
Speaker 3: in the country illegally.

53
00:03:07,560 --> 00:03:11,560
Speaker 1: So the real purpose of that language of subject to

54
00:03:11,600 --> 00:03:15,880
Speaker 1: the jurisdiction is to cover the following situation. If I

55
00:03:15,960 --> 00:03:20,320
Speaker 1: am here and I am working for the Embassy of Denmark,

56
00:03:20,440 --> 00:03:23,960
Speaker 1: let's say that means that I am, you know, an

57
00:03:24,000 --> 00:03:28,440
Speaker 1: ambassador or a consul general or something. I am subject

58
00:03:28,520 --> 00:03:31,360
Speaker 1: to the privileges and immunities of something called the Vienna

59
00:03:31,440 --> 00:03:34,840
Speaker 1: Convention on Consular Relations. You may have seen, or your

60
00:03:34,920 --> 00:03:37,960
Speaker 1: viewers or listeners may have seen, you know, movies like

61
00:03:38,040 --> 00:03:41,280
Speaker 1: Lethal Weapon where people say I have diplomatic community, you

62
00:03:41,320 --> 00:03:44,960
Speaker 1: cannot arrest me for whatever crimes I'm committing in this

63
00:03:45,040 --> 00:03:49,080
Speaker 1: movie or whatever. And that comes from the Vienna Convention

64
00:03:49,200 --> 00:03:53,800
Speaker 1: on Consular Relations, meaning people who have diplomatic community are

65
00:03:53,800 --> 00:03:56,720
Speaker 1: not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. So

66
00:03:56,760 --> 00:03:59,840
Speaker 1: what does that mean. If people who have diplomatic community

67
00:03:59,840 --> 00:04:03,040
Speaker 1: have children in the United States, those children do not

68
00:04:03,160 --> 00:04:07,120
Speaker 1: become US citizens. That's what that means. It's historically been

69
00:04:07,160 --> 00:04:11,040
Speaker 1: meant to apply to people with diplomatic communities. President Trump,

70
00:04:11,280 --> 00:04:13,920
Speaker 1: and they want to say that someone who is here

71
00:04:13,960 --> 00:04:18,239
Speaker 1: in America illegally, who has children in the United States

72
00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:22,760
Speaker 1: is not covered by the fourteenth Amendment because they're saying

73
00:04:22,839 --> 00:04:26,000
Speaker 1: that they want to interpret this clause of not being

74
00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:30,040
Speaker 1: subject to the jurisdiction of the United States as meaning

75
00:04:30,120 --> 00:04:34,920
Speaker 1: that those individuals don't get birthright citizenship, which has not

76
00:04:35,080 --> 00:04:38,880
Speaker 1: been historically the case. Historically, even if an inndocumented person

77
00:04:38,920 --> 00:04:43,520
Speaker 1: has children, those children are Americans. Here's what's interesting about that.

78
00:04:44,000 --> 00:04:46,320
Speaker 1: If you really want to make that argument, what you

79
00:04:46,320 --> 00:04:51,000
Speaker 1: would technically be saying is that an undocumented person is

80
00:04:51,040 --> 00:04:54,280
Speaker 1: not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, meaning

81
00:04:54,520 --> 00:04:58,440
Speaker 1: that they have diplomatic communities. So someone who's here without

82
00:04:58,560 --> 00:05:03,040
Speaker 1: status could act, you know, park their car illegally or

83
00:05:03,080 --> 00:05:06,320
Speaker 1: speed or do something else and they would say, well,

84
00:05:06,760 --> 00:05:09,279
Speaker 1: you know, the President says that I'm that's subject to

85
00:05:09,320 --> 00:05:12,640
Speaker 1: the jurisdiction of the United States. So there you go

86
00:05:12,800 --> 00:05:14,960
Speaker 1: and the story. So I don't know how they intend

87
00:05:15,040 --> 00:05:18,440
Speaker 1: to harmonize that point for the purposes of this discussion.

88
00:05:18,760 --> 00:05:22,800
Speaker 3: Is there only one case, one Supreme Court case that's considered.

89
00:05:23,720 --> 00:05:25,920
Speaker 1: There is a case from more than one hundred years

90
00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:29,480
Speaker 1: ago called the United States versus One kim Ark, and

91
00:05:29,520 --> 00:05:31,560
Speaker 1: it was a case where there was a child born

92
00:05:31,600 --> 00:05:34,240
Speaker 1: in the United States to Chinese parents who at that

93
00:05:34,400 --> 00:05:38,360
Speaker 1: time were prohibited from becoming US citizens because there was

94
00:05:38,400 --> 00:05:42,320
Speaker 1: all of these laws about how to exclude Chinese nationals,

95
00:05:42,320 --> 00:05:45,839
Speaker 1: and then there was laws about actually deporting legal Chinese

96
00:05:45,880 --> 00:05:48,880
Speaker 1: people who were here, and so they were trying to

97
00:05:48,960 --> 00:05:53,960
Speaker 1: deport this child who was part of this you know,

98
00:05:54,200 --> 00:06:00,599
Speaker 1: just Chinese uh desire to deport people from China, and

99
00:06:00,760 --> 00:06:03,680
Speaker 1: they said that in this situation, that child is a

100
00:06:03,800 --> 00:06:07,080
Speaker 1: US citizen, you can't actually deport this person because the

101
00:06:07,200 --> 00:06:10,960
Speaker 1: child was born in the United States. And so that's

102
00:06:11,040 --> 00:06:14,960
Speaker 1: the only case we have analyzing that issue. And the

103
00:06:15,080 --> 00:06:18,479
Speaker 1: question is, Okay, if President Trump issues an executive order

104
00:06:18,920 --> 00:06:22,440
Speaker 1: when it gets challenged, would this version of the Supreme

105
00:06:22,480 --> 00:06:25,440
Speaker 1: Court decide no, we're going to actually look at this

106
00:06:25,480 --> 00:06:30,000
Speaker 1: again and decide that this subject to the jurisdiction actually

107
00:06:30,000 --> 00:06:32,800
Speaker 1: can be interpreted in a way to prevent people who

108
00:06:32,839 --> 00:06:36,160
Speaker 1: are undocumented from being able to have kids who are

109
00:06:36,240 --> 00:06:37,080
Speaker 1: US citizens.

110
00:06:37,720 --> 00:06:42,520
Speaker 3: So, as you mentioned, Trump said that he could enact

111
00:06:42,560 --> 00:06:46,680
Speaker 3: a plan to do away with birthright citizenship through an

112
00:06:46,720 --> 00:06:47,960
Speaker 3: executive order.

113
00:06:48,600 --> 00:06:51,040
Speaker 1: Correct, and the plan would be as follows. What he

114
00:06:51,080 --> 00:06:53,520
Speaker 1: would try to do is to force the issue and

115
00:06:53,520 --> 00:06:56,159
Speaker 1: get it before the courts. In this way, he would

116
00:06:56,200 --> 00:06:59,960
Speaker 1: just issue an executive order that says, dear United States

117
00:07:00,200 --> 00:07:04,360
Speaker 1: Passport Office, if somebody comes and applies for a passport

118
00:07:04,520 --> 00:07:06,760
Speaker 1: and the only thing that they hand you is a

119
00:07:06,880 --> 00:07:11,000
Speaker 1: birth certificate and they don't give you anything else, You're

120
00:07:11,000 --> 00:07:13,840
Speaker 1: gonna have to find out some information about the parents

121
00:07:13,880 --> 00:07:17,440
Speaker 1: before you give them a US passport. And this will

122
00:07:17,440 --> 00:07:22,120
Speaker 1: require a major change in the way the Passport Office operates. Currently,

123
00:07:22,280 --> 00:07:24,560
Speaker 1: you show your birth certificate, that's the end of story.

124
00:07:24,680 --> 00:07:28,400
Speaker 1: That they confirm it with the state registrar, and that's

125
00:07:28,440 --> 00:07:31,400
Speaker 1: the end. You get a passport. Now you will have

126
00:07:31,520 --> 00:07:35,160
Speaker 1: to show some information on at least one of your

127
00:07:35,240 --> 00:07:38,000
Speaker 1: parents to show that at least one of them was

128
00:07:38,080 --> 00:07:41,600
Speaker 1: legally here inside the United States at the time of

129
00:07:41,680 --> 00:07:45,600
Speaker 1: your birth. And so that's going to be quite fascinating

130
00:07:45,680 --> 00:07:49,680
Speaker 1: because that will require a whole new adjudication to occur

131
00:07:50,360 --> 00:07:54,280
Speaker 1: that didn't previously occur. So on top of just the

132
00:07:54,440 --> 00:08:00,640
Speaker 1: normal adjudication that would be well, is this whole exercise

133
00:08:00,680 --> 00:08:04,200
Speaker 1: of trying to get rid of birthright citizenship illegal and

134
00:08:04,240 --> 00:08:07,120
Speaker 1: that litigation is certainly going to happen. There might actually

135
00:08:07,160 --> 00:08:10,000
Speaker 1: be case by case adjudication, which is permitted. There's a

136
00:08:10,000 --> 00:08:13,200
Speaker 1: lot of this passport adjudication that goes on in America,

137
00:08:13,560 --> 00:08:16,280
Speaker 1: which is that when the state Department denies you a passport,

138
00:08:16,360 --> 00:08:18,880
Speaker 1: you can actually file a federal court case and you

139
00:08:18,880 --> 00:08:21,280
Speaker 1: can say, look, I don't have this information because my

140
00:08:21,400 --> 00:08:24,800
Speaker 1: mother or my father abandoned me or whatever reason. And

141
00:08:24,840 --> 00:08:27,880
Speaker 1: you might be someone who's lineage is here four hundred

142
00:08:27,960 --> 00:08:30,840
Speaker 1: years but you don't know because you were abandoned by

143
00:08:30,840 --> 00:08:33,839
Speaker 1: your parents or something else. And it's all going to

144
00:08:33,920 --> 00:08:38,240
Speaker 1: be quite fascinating to see how the Passport office handles

145
00:08:38,240 --> 00:08:41,160
Speaker 1: all of this. But that's the idea get that case

146
00:08:41,280 --> 00:08:46,239
Speaker 1: in motion by triggering through an executive order an instruction

147
00:08:46,440 --> 00:08:49,760
Speaker 1: to the State Department that says, don't just accept the

148
00:08:49,760 --> 00:08:52,480
Speaker 1: birth certificate. You're gonna have to find out some information

149
00:08:52,559 --> 00:08:55,720
Speaker 1: about the parents of these individuals to see if at

150
00:08:55,800 --> 00:08:59,120
Speaker 1: least one of them was in legal status before this

151
00:08:59,240 --> 00:09:01,920
Speaker 1: child was born, before you give them a US passport.

152
00:09:02,240 --> 00:09:04,560
Speaker 1: And then there's a belief that the executive order would

153
00:09:04,559 --> 00:09:09,560
Speaker 1: also cover the Social Security Administration and would say that

154
00:09:09,720 --> 00:09:12,640
Speaker 1: if a child tries to apply for a Social Security number,

155
00:09:13,160 --> 00:09:17,280
Speaker 1: that social Security number wouldn't be given unless, again there's

156
00:09:17,320 --> 00:09:20,959
Speaker 1: some beliefs that the parents were in the United States legally.

157
00:09:21,559 --> 00:09:25,120
Speaker 1: This also would require a dramatic change in how the

158
00:09:25,160 --> 00:09:27,880
Speaker 1: Social Security Administration does this, because a lot of this

159
00:09:28,360 --> 00:09:32,160
Speaker 1: has already been sort of automated through the hospital that

160
00:09:32,240 --> 00:09:33,839
Speaker 1: you have a hospital and you have a birth, and

161
00:09:33,920 --> 00:09:36,080
Speaker 1: you have a birth certificate, and then you have a

162
00:09:36,080 --> 00:09:39,000
Speaker 1: Social Security number that gets generated, and a lot of

163
00:09:39,040 --> 00:09:43,480
Speaker 1: this is quite almost automated in its nature. And so

164
00:09:43,600 --> 00:09:47,439
Speaker 1: now you have to have this new and quite potentially

165
00:09:47,480 --> 00:09:51,080
Speaker 1: burden some extra requirements that you provide all of the

166
00:09:51,120 --> 00:09:54,280
Speaker 1: evidence on the parents. It's going to actually be quite

167
00:09:54,320 --> 00:09:56,440
Speaker 1: a cumbersome process while it's in litigation.

168
00:09:57,200 --> 00:10:00,360
Speaker 3: If he issued an executive order like that, it would

169
00:10:00,400 --> 00:10:03,760
Speaker 3: immediately be challenged in the courts. What do you think

170
00:10:04,040 --> 00:10:08,000
Speaker 3: the chances are that the courts would allow.

171
00:10:07,720 --> 00:10:11,360
Speaker 1: That my sort of belief in terms of if you

172
00:10:11,480 --> 00:10:16,080
Speaker 1: had judges that were CHET GPT judges and not human judges,

173
00:10:16,400 --> 00:10:18,640
Speaker 1: for instance, I don't think the case would get very far.

174
00:10:18,760 --> 00:10:21,480
Speaker 1: Meaning I don't think that you could end birthright citizenship

175
00:10:21,520 --> 00:10:25,000
Speaker 1: in this way because I think given the historical interpretation

176
00:10:25,120 --> 00:10:28,760
Speaker 1: of it, and given what this word subject to the

177
00:10:28,840 --> 00:10:32,200
Speaker 1: jurisdiction means and what it was intended for, I don't

178
00:10:32,240 --> 00:10:35,200
Speaker 1: see how it would be possible to say that it

179
00:10:35,320 --> 00:10:40,080
Speaker 1: was intended to cover undocumented individuals. So I do think

180
00:10:40,120 --> 00:10:43,320
Speaker 1: it would be more of just saying you tried, and

181
00:10:43,360 --> 00:10:45,400
Speaker 1: then having the court shut it down and then moving

182
00:10:45,480 --> 00:10:49,240
Speaker 1: to some other mechanism to try to resolve this. But

183
00:10:50,120 --> 00:10:53,840
Speaker 1: because the judges are human and there isn't just a

184
00:10:54,200 --> 00:10:58,040
Speaker 1: chat GPT component to this, you never know. Maybe some

185
00:10:58,120 --> 00:11:00,800
Speaker 1: people will make that argument, because there's certainly a lot

186
00:11:00,880 --> 00:11:04,040
Speaker 1: of political people making the argument right now. But I

187
00:11:04,160 --> 00:11:06,880
Speaker 1: just don't think you get to fight Supreme Court justices

188
00:11:06,920 --> 00:11:09,079
Speaker 1: at the end of the day on this issue, because

189
00:11:09,120 --> 00:11:13,560
Speaker 1: I think the textualists will be clear that we know

190
00:11:13,760 --> 00:11:16,040
Speaker 1: what the intent of this was at the time that

191
00:11:16,200 --> 00:11:19,480
Speaker 1: was written, and there's no way we can say it

192
00:11:19,559 --> 00:11:22,440
Speaker 1: meant to cover this issue of immigration because during the

193
00:11:22,440 --> 00:11:26,720
Speaker 1: Civil War we still didn't really have immigration laws yet

194
00:11:26,800 --> 00:11:30,800
Speaker 1: in the United States. The first real immigration laws came

195
00:11:31,200 --> 00:11:34,320
Speaker 1: after the Civil War in the late eighteen hundreds. So

196
00:11:34,440 --> 00:11:37,840
Speaker 1: the idea that anything related to the Fourteenth Amendment had

197
00:11:37,840 --> 00:11:41,280
Speaker 1: anything to do with immigration would be very difficult to

198
00:11:41,520 --> 00:11:46,160
Speaker 1: justify because it just wasn't in the cards at that time.

199
00:11:46,559 --> 00:11:49,120
Speaker 3: Okay, stay with me, Leon coming up next on the

200
00:11:49,120 --> 00:11:53,240
Speaker 3: Bloomberg Law Show, Why MAGA is fighting over h one

201
00:11:53,320 --> 00:11:57,480
Speaker 3: B visas. I'm June Gross. When you're listening to Bloomberg.

202
00:11:57,960 --> 00:12:01,719
Speaker 3: Donald Trump has promised a crack down on illegal immigration

203
00:12:01,960 --> 00:12:05,520
Speaker 3: on day one of his administration. He's also promised to

204
00:12:05,520 --> 00:12:09,440
Speaker 3: get rid of birthright citizenship, which gives anyone born in

205
00:12:09,440 --> 00:12:13,480
Speaker 3: this country American citizenship, even if their parents are here

206
00:12:13,600 --> 00:12:17,400
Speaker 3: illegally or are here legally on tourist visas.

207
00:12:17,679 --> 00:12:20,439
Speaker 2: My order will also end their unfair practice known as

208
00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:24,280
Speaker 2: birth tourism. Were hundreds of thousands of people from all

209
00:12:24,320 --> 00:12:28,440
Speaker 2: over the planet squad in hotels for their last few

210
00:12:28,440 --> 00:12:33,400
Speaker 2: weeks of pregnancy to illegitimately and illegally obtain you a

211
00:12:33,520 --> 00:12:39,520
Speaker 2: citizenship for the child, often to later exploit chain migration

212
00:12:39,679 --> 00:12:42,760
Speaker 2: to jump the line and get green cards for themselves

213
00:12:42,840 --> 00:12:44,160
Speaker 2: and their family members.

214
00:12:44,800 --> 00:12:49,400
Speaker 3: I've been talking to immigration law expert Leon Fresco. Leon

215
00:12:49,960 --> 00:12:56,280
Speaker 3: Trump could attempt to end birthright citizenship through a constitutional amendment, theoretically,

216
00:12:56,320 --> 00:13:01,600
Speaker 3: because a constitutional amendment requires two thirds of both houses

217
00:13:02,080 --> 00:13:05,520
Speaker 3: and ratification by three fourths of the state legislature, so

218
00:13:05,720 --> 00:13:09,679
Speaker 3: it's almost an impossibility these days. Are there any estimates

219
00:13:09,679 --> 00:13:14,160
Speaker 3: of how many people have birthright citizenship who are born

220
00:13:14,240 --> 00:13:17,199
Speaker 3: here but their parents are not here legally.

221
00:13:17,760 --> 00:13:20,240
Speaker 1: Well, one of the issues is it's going to depend

222
00:13:20,400 --> 00:13:24,160
Speaker 1: how you want to define the excluded class, because some

223
00:13:24,200 --> 00:13:27,560
Speaker 1: people want to say your parents had to have had

224
00:13:27,920 --> 00:13:32,240
Speaker 1: citizenship or at least a green card meaning lawful permanent residence,

225
00:13:32,679 --> 00:13:35,199
Speaker 1: and if they were here on any other visa, meaning

226
00:13:35,240 --> 00:13:37,480
Speaker 1: a tourist visa. So even if they were here legally,

227
00:13:37,520 --> 00:13:39,679
Speaker 1: but they were here on a tourist visa or a

228
00:13:39,720 --> 00:13:42,440
Speaker 1: work visa. Some of these work visas can be quite

229
00:13:42,440 --> 00:13:46,320
Speaker 1: extensive in terms of their length that these still wouldn't

230
00:13:46,360 --> 00:13:49,760
Speaker 1: count to confer birthright citizenship. So if we were talking

231
00:13:49,880 --> 00:13:53,480
Speaker 1: about that, we'd be talking about millions of people. If

232
00:13:53,480 --> 00:13:59,760
Speaker 1: we're talking about just the children of two purely undocumented parents,

233
00:14:00,080 --> 00:14:02,960
Speaker 1: we're probably talking about hundreds of thousands of people. So

234
00:14:03,000 --> 00:14:06,120
Speaker 1: we're not talking about millions of people full we are

235
00:14:06,280 --> 00:14:09,760
Speaker 1: talking about hundreds of thousands of people. But there is

236
00:14:10,120 --> 00:14:12,679
Speaker 1: some concern and it has been raised in the past,

237
00:14:12,720 --> 00:14:16,680
Speaker 1: and it's certainly not something that is nonexistent about this

238
00:14:16,840 --> 00:14:21,440
Speaker 1: concept of quote unquote birth tourism where people come to

239
00:14:21,480 --> 00:14:26,240
Speaker 1: the United States for the purpose of creating a United

240
00:14:26,240 --> 00:14:28,680
Speaker 1: States that is in child that can then be used

241
00:14:29,040 --> 00:14:31,560
Speaker 1: to apply for the Green card for the parents twenty

242
00:14:31,560 --> 00:14:34,960
Speaker 1: one years later. And that certainly does happen, and I've

243
00:14:34,960 --> 00:14:37,800
Speaker 1: seen those cases, so it's not that it doesn't happen.

244
00:14:38,200 --> 00:14:41,880
Speaker 1: But the question is with those people also be excluded

245
00:14:42,320 --> 00:14:45,000
Speaker 1: from the group. I know that they want to exclude

246
00:14:45,040 --> 00:14:47,840
Speaker 1: those people moving forward, but then actually you also have

247
00:14:48,240 --> 00:14:52,920
Speaker 1: some legitimate questions about there are many scenarios where what

248
00:14:53,040 --> 00:14:57,640
Speaker 1: is happening is it's not quote unquote birth tourism, but

249
00:14:58,160 --> 00:15:04,600
Speaker 1: that's a country doesn't necessarily have a specific medical advanced

250
00:15:04,800 --> 00:15:08,320
Speaker 1: thing for whatever medical situation is happening in a pregnancy,

251
00:15:09,120 --> 00:15:11,560
Speaker 1: and the doctors in that country will say, hey, you

252
00:15:11,640 --> 00:15:14,320
Speaker 1: really need to travel to the US because you have

253
00:15:14,360 --> 00:15:17,720
Speaker 1: a very high risk pregnancy or there's some complication with

254
00:15:17,800 --> 00:15:21,440
Speaker 1: the fetus or whatever it may be. And the question

255
00:15:21,560 --> 00:15:23,840
Speaker 1: is are all of those people going to be banned

256
00:15:24,200 --> 00:15:27,080
Speaker 1: from entering the United States? Currently those people are banned.

257
00:15:27,120 --> 00:15:29,120
Speaker 1: What they have to show is that they have enough

258
00:15:29,120 --> 00:15:33,160
Speaker 1: money to have the coverage and cover the costs, and

259
00:15:33,320 --> 00:15:36,560
Speaker 1: that there really is some medical urgency for this. And

260
00:15:36,600 --> 00:15:40,440
Speaker 1: if you don't actually have any immigration problems in your background,

261
00:15:40,720 --> 00:15:43,880
Speaker 1: you can get a visitor visa. And would this be

262
00:15:43,920 --> 00:15:48,239
Speaker 1: eliminated here even in these cases of very high risk pregnancies.

263
00:15:48,480 --> 00:15:51,680
Speaker 1: I don't know, but it would certainly be one step

264
00:15:51,800 --> 00:15:54,840
Speaker 1: backward in these specific humanitarian cases.

265
00:15:55,280 --> 00:15:59,200
Speaker 3: And let's say there is birthright citizenship. A child is

266
00:15:59,240 --> 00:16:02,520
Speaker 3: born one years later tries to get green cards for

267
00:16:02,600 --> 00:16:06,280
Speaker 3: his or her parents. Are those green cards easy to

268
00:16:06,320 --> 00:16:07,840
Speaker 3: get if you're a citizen?

269
00:16:08,720 --> 00:16:11,200
Speaker 1: Yeah, believe it or not, they are. The test would

270
00:16:11,240 --> 00:16:13,120
Speaker 1: be that you would have to show that there's a

271
00:16:13,240 --> 00:16:17,000
Speaker 1: US citizen, which that child is now, who's over twenty one,

272
00:16:17,640 --> 00:16:20,160
Speaker 1: and that they are applying for their parents, and that

273
00:16:20,280 --> 00:16:25,360
Speaker 1: there is an actual parent child relationship there. And that's it.

274
00:16:25,480 --> 00:16:27,640
Speaker 1: That's the test. I mean. The only other thing that

275
00:16:27,920 --> 00:16:31,720
Speaker 1: is required is you need the child to have a

276
00:16:31,720 --> 00:16:35,600
Speaker 1: certain amount of financial means in order to guarantee that

277
00:16:35,640 --> 00:16:39,120
Speaker 1: the parents will not be dependent on welfare. But usually

278
00:16:39,160 --> 00:16:42,240
Speaker 1: what happens in that situation is the parents will give

279
00:16:42,520 --> 00:16:46,000
Speaker 1: the child the assets that are necessary in order to

280
00:16:46,760 --> 00:16:50,880
Speaker 1: have that burden mess or they find a United States

281
00:16:50,920 --> 00:16:55,400
Speaker 1: citizen who's willing to provide that guarantee that they won't

282
00:16:55,920 --> 00:16:59,920
Speaker 1: use public benefits. But that's the only real obstacle is this,

283
00:17:00,320 --> 00:17:02,600
Speaker 1: Who's going to be able to say that you won't

284
00:17:02,640 --> 00:17:06,879
Speaker 1: be using public benefits? There's an assets test that's there

285
00:17:07,359 --> 00:17:09,480
Speaker 1: that you could just say I have sufficient assets to

286
00:17:09,520 --> 00:17:10,919
Speaker 1: make sure that this doesn't happen.

287
00:17:11,080 --> 00:17:14,280
Speaker 3: Well, could Trump change that part of it and say

288
00:17:14,440 --> 00:17:16,240
Speaker 3: we're not going to get green cards that easily?

289
00:17:16,760 --> 00:17:19,320
Speaker 1: Well, what Trump could do is make it harder in

290
00:17:19,400 --> 00:17:23,480
Speaker 1: that situation to meet the assets test. That certainly he

291
00:17:23,520 --> 00:17:26,320
Speaker 1: can do through the public charge a component of this,

292
00:17:26,760 --> 00:17:31,040
Speaker 1: but he can't actually change how the green card works

293
00:17:31,080 --> 00:17:34,439
Speaker 1: without changing the statute. So there you would need Congress,

294
00:17:34,760 --> 00:17:37,119
Speaker 1: and you certainly could do that. You couldn't do it

295
00:17:37,160 --> 00:17:39,760
Speaker 1: through the child because then you'd have what's called two

296
00:17:39,840 --> 00:17:42,639
Speaker 1: different classes of citizens, and you could have an equal

297
00:17:42,680 --> 00:17:47,080
Speaker 1: protection problem, but you could do it through legislating against

298
00:17:47,119 --> 00:17:50,960
Speaker 1: the parents. And you could say that a parent who

299
00:17:51,000 --> 00:17:56,639
Speaker 1: gave birth to a child in the United States while

300
00:17:56,680 --> 00:17:59,840
Speaker 1: either on a visitor visa or any illegal status, is

301
00:18:00,119 --> 00:18:03,880
Speaker 1: not able to obtain lawful permanent residence on the basis

302
00:18:03,920 --> 00:18:06,600
Speaker 1: of that child. So you do it that way, You've

303
00:18:06,640 --> 00:18:09,760
Speaker 1: put a ban on the parents and not on the child,

304
00:18:10,320 --> 00:18:13,280
Speaker 1: and so that way it wouldn't be an equal protection violation.

305
00:18:14,040 --> 00:18:16,160
Speaker 1: And so you could do that, but again this would

306
00:18:16,160 --> 00:18:19,119
Speaker 1: require an act of Congress. And the question is, you

307
00:18:19,160 --> 00:18:22,520
Speaker 1: know what is Congress willing to do on a bipartisan basis.

308
00:18:22,800 --> 00:18:25,120
Speaker 1: I do think you could get to something like that

309
00:18:25,240 --> 00:18:29,199
Speaker 1: if you had a larger overhaul of everything, and so

310
00:18:29,320 --> 00:18:32,160
Speaker 1: you had some things that helped people who were already here,

311
00:18:32,600 --> 00:18:34,920
Speaker 1: and then you did some things on the enforcement side

312
00:18:34,960 --> 00:18:37,080
Speaker 1: and all of that. You could get to a bill

313
00:18:37,160 --> 00:18:40,040
Speaker 1: like that. But just a bill that just did that

314
00:18:40,520 --> 00:18:44,240
Speaker 1: would probably be unlikely to get any Democratic support without

315
00:18:44,359 --> 00:18:46,720
Speaker 1: something in it that Democrats also want.

316
00:18:47,640 --> 00:18:49,840
Speaker 3: Let's talk about the H one B visas and this

317
00:18:50,080 --> 00:18:55,360
Speaker 3: public fight among high profile supporters of Trump over these

318
00:18:55,440 --> 00:18:59,280
Speaker 3: visas for highly skilled workers. Are we just talking about

319
00:18:59,320 --> 00:19:02,919
Speaker 3: eighty five thousand visas a year? Is that the cap?

320
00:19:03,359 --> 00:19:05,760
Speaker 1: Well, here's what's very interesting about that. The program is

321
00:19:05,800 --> 00:19:09,639
Speaker 1: actually quite complex in this sense. So there's first a

322
00:19:09,760 --> 00:19:14,199
Speaker 1: sixty five thousand annual cap for people who apply for

323
00:19:14,240 --> 00:19:17,600
Speaker 1: the visa who have a college degree and have a

324
00:19:17,720 --> 00:19:21,600
Speaker 1: job that requires that specific college degree. Then there's an

325
00:19:21,600 --> 00:19:25,880
Speaker 1: extra twenty thousand for people who have a master's degree

326
00:19:26,400 --> 00:19:29,960
Speaker 1: and have a job that requires that master's degree. So

327
00:19:30,040 --> 00:19:32,560
Speaker 1: that's the key test is that it has to match that.

328
00:19:33,040 --> 00:19:36,440
Speaker 1: But in addition, there's an exemption from the cap, meaning

329
00:19:36,440 --> 00:19:39,720
Speaker 1: you can exceed the cap in an unlimited amount for

330
00:19:40,080 --> 00:19:45,640
Speaker 1: any individual who is employed by either a nonprofit research institution.

331
00:19:46,440 --> 00:19:49,639
Speaker 1: That would be things like you know, the Script's Research

332
00:19:49,720 --> 00:19:54,880
Speaker 1: Foundation or the Bookings Institute, or any nonprofit that does research,

333
00:19:55,240 --> 00:19:59,199
Speaker 1: or a university, so a university can also employ the person,

334
00:20:00,040 --> 00:20:05,760
Speaker 1: and also the governments themselves or a contractor who's providing

335
00:20:05,880 --> 00:20:10,520
Speaker 1: the services to the government. And so through those mechanisms

336
00:20:10,560 --> 00:20:13,760
Speaker 1: you actually have you know, maybe two three hundred thousand

337
00:20:13,840 --> 00:20:17,439
Speaker 1: people a year who use the H one B visa

338
00:20:17,520 --> 00:20:20,119
Speaker 1: one way or the other in order to remain in

339
00:20:20,160 --> 00:20:23,120
Speaker 1: the United States, and the traditional pipeline is you come

340
00:20:23,160 --> 00:20:27,040
Speaker 1: as a foreign student. You then do something called OPT

341
00:20:27,320 --> 00:20:30,879
Speaker 1: which is optional practical training, which is something that was

342
00:20:30,920 --> 00:20:34,320
Speaker 1: invented by regulation, which allows you to work while you

343
00:20:34,400 --> 00:20:37,639
Speaker 1: are on a student visa. Then if the company that

344
00:20:37,680 --> 00:20:40,000
Speaker 1: you're working for like to you, they petition for you

345
00:20:40,040 --> 00:20:43,000
Speaker 1: to have one of visa AH one B visas. And

346
00:20:43,040 --> 00:20:46,840
Speaker 1: then if that happens and they like you even further,

347
00:20:46,960 --> 00:20:48,920
Speaker 1: they can petition for you to have a Green card.

348
00:20:49,400 --> 00:20:52,640
Speaker 1: But the problem is these green card categories are all

349
00:20:52,680 --> 00:20:56,400
Speaker 1: backlogs for many, many, many years, and so what's happening

350
00:20:56,560 --> 00:20:59,440
Speaker 1: is people are stuck on these H one B visas

351
00:20:59,440 --> 00:21:03,439
Speaker 1: for many years. And both the people on the H

352
00:21:03,480 --> 00:21:07,159
Speaker 1: one V visa but also the competitors for the people

353
00:21:07,280 --> 00:21:10,680
Speaker 1: on the H one V visas believe that this creates

354
00:21:10,680 --> 00:21:15,520
Speaker 1: a workplace situation that is very anti American worker because

355
00:21:15,560 --> 00:21:19,560
Speaker 1: if you have people that are basically stuck at an employer,

356
00:21:20,240 --> 00:21:24,320
Speaker 1: then that not only makes them in a difficult situation,

357
00:21:24,400 --> 00:21:28,040
Speaker 1: but it also makes the American competitors disadvantage because why

358
00:21:28,080 --> 00:21:31,960
Speaker 1: wouldn't an employer prefer someone who's stuck than someone who

359
00:21:32,160 --> 00:21:33,200
Speaker 1: has free agency.

360
00:21:34,560 --> 00:21:37,760
Speaker 3: So Leon it doesn't seem like it's that many people.

361
00:21:37,880 --> 00:21:40,800
Speaker 3: Then why this focus on it. I mean, we're not

362
00:21:40,840 --> 00:21:42,320
Speaker 3: talking millions.

363
00:21:41,840 --> 00:21:46,239
Speaker 1: Are we correct? We're not talking millions. The reason I

364
00:21:46,320 --> 00:21:49,560
Speaker 1: think that you see this anger in this debate is

365
00:21:49,600 --> 00:21:54,880
Speaker 1: because it's a very emotional debate, meaning that the people

366
00:21:54,960 --> 00:21:58,400
Speaker 1: who feel that they've been aggrieved by this feel that

367
00:21:58,480 --> 00:22:02,080
Speaker 1: they've done everything correct, meaning they've gone to a university,

368
00:22:02,440 --> 00:22:05,800
Speaker 1: they've obtained the degree. It's been a degree and some

369
00:22:05,920 --> 00:22:10,280
Speaker 1: subject that's not been a highly desirable one, meaning you're

370
00:22:10,280 --> 00:22:13,600
Speaker 1: doing something very difficult at school. You're getting an engineering degree,

371
00:22:13,680 --> 00:22:17,280
Speaker 1: or you're getting a mechanical engineering degree, or or something

372
00:22:17,320 --> 00:22:20,240
Speaker 1: that is a very very difficult, arduous experience. So you

373
00:22:20,280 --> 00:22:22,119
Speaker 1: do all of that, and then at the end of

374
00:22:22,160 --> 00:22:25,040
Speaker 1: the day, your reward isn't like it might be if

375
00:22:25,040 --> 00:22:27,720
Speaker 1: you go into banking and you're making millions of dollars.

376
00:22:28,119 --> 00:22:31,639
Speaker 1: You're making not so much money, and you're competing with

377
00:22:31,720 --> 00:22:35,239
Speaker 1: people from all over the world where those people are

378
00:22:35,320 --> 00:22:38,399
Speaker 1: driving down the cost of your wages. This is what

379
00:22:38,560 --> 00:22:41,959
Speaker 1: people get angry about, and even if it hasn't happened

380
00:22:41,960 --> 00:22:45,600
Speaker 1: to them, they anecdotally will know of a story in

381
00:22:45,640 --> 00:22:48,639
Speaker 1: which it's happened and they get upset about it.

382
00:22:49,119 --> 00:22:52,040
Speaker 3: And so what are Trump supporters who are critics of

383
00:22:52,119 --> 00:22:55,320
Speaker 3: the H one B visa program looking to do.

384
00:22:56,040 --> 00:22:59,320
Speaker 1: Basically, here is what they would want to do. And

385
00:22:59,400 --> 00:23:03,920
Speaker 1: this is where it gets super complicated right now. Unlike

386
00:23:04,040 --> 00:23:07,359
Speaker 1: the green card process, because when you apply for someone

387
00:23:07,400 --> 00:23:11,880
Speaker 1: for unemployment based green card, in many circumstances, not all,

388
00:23:11,960 --> 00:23:14,200
Speaker 1: but in many, the way you have to get that

389
00:23:14,320 --> 00:23:16,560
Speaker 1: employment based green card is to do what's called the

390
00:23:16,680 --> 00:23:20,159
Speaker 1: labor market test, where you proved to the Department of Labor.

391
00:23:20,480 --> 00:23:23,760
Speaker 1: I tried to hire an American, but that American was

392
00:23:23,800 --> 00:23:26,760
Speaker 1: not available, and so that's why I had to hire

393
00:23:26,760 --> 00:23:29,640
Speaker 1: the foreign national. Now, there's a lot of criticism about

394
00:23:29,640 --> 00:23:32,880
Speaker 1: how that process works and how people operate in it

395
00:23:32,920 --> 00:23:35,760
Speaker 1: and all of that. So that process is by no

396
00:23:35,880 --> 00:23:39,560
Speaker 1: means perfect, but they want to put that into the

397
00:23:39,760 --> 00:23:41,679
Speaker 1: H one B as well, because right now the H

398
00:23:41,720 --> 00:23:47,240
Speaker 1: one B does not prevent a company from directly hiring

399
00:23:47,280 --> 00:23:50,840
Speaker 1: a foreign worker without trying to first determine if an

400
00:23:50,840 --> 00:23:53,920
Speaker 1: American was available for the job. There are some people

401
00:23:53,960 --> 00:23:56,159
Speaker 1: who just want to end the program or to have

402
00:23:56,560 --> 00:23:59,600
Speaker 1: President Trump do a travel band like he did with

403
00:23:59,680 --> 00:24:02,080
Speaker 1: other visa You know when there was the Middle Eastern

404
00:24:02,119 --> 00:24:05,040
Speaker 1: Travel Band and just say, look, I'm banning the whole program.

405
00:24:05,520 --> 00:24:09,400
Speaker 1: But that's not ultimately what the press release of President

406
00:24:09,440 --> 00:24:13,600
Speaker 1: Trump said or what others said. What they came to

407
00:24:14,359 --> 00:24:16,720
Speaker 1: is this other debate of where they want to go

408
00:24:16,960 --> 00:24:20,000
Speaker 1: is to say, if somebody's going to hire someone on

409
00:24:20,040 --> 00:24:22,640
Speaker 1: an H one B, they have to show that there

410
00:24:22,680 --> 00:24:25,040
Speaker 1: isn't an American worker who can do that job. But

411
00:24:25,320 --> 00:24:28,920
Speaker 1: here's where that gets complicated. The H one B Statute

412
00:24:29,000 --> 00:24:33,280
Speaker 1: was written with such detail and complexity unlike any other

413
00:24:33,400 --> 00:24:36,520
Speaker 1: statute because when it was written, it was written by

414
00:24:36,800 --> 00:24:41,960
Speaker 1: baffers and legislators who knew how contentious immigration was and

415
00:24:42,000 --> 00:24:45,399
Speaker 1: how it could be subject to the wins of different administrations.

416
00:24:45,400 --> 00:24:48,000
Speaker 1: So they were very wise at the time and how

417
00:24:48,040 --> 00:24:52,040
Speaker 1: they implemented their goals, and so unlike many other things,

418
00:24:52,119 --> 00:24:56,760
Speaker 1: these individuals actually were very very careful on how they

419
00:24:56,840 --> 00:24:59,000
Speaker 1: wrote it. And so any change to the H one

420
00:24:59,080 --> 00:25:02,600
Speaker 1: B pretty much has be done by statute, meaning Congress

421
00:25:02,640 --> 00:25:05,159
Speaker 1: has the right to change it. It's very hard to

422
00:25:05,240 --> 00:25:06,520
Speaker 1: change it administratively.

423
00:25:06,840 --> 00:25:11,359
Speaker 3: And big picture, leon do you think that come Inauguration day,

424
00:25:11,680 --> 00:25:14,440
Speaker 3: homeland security is going to be geared up enough to

425
00:25:14,480 --> 00:25:16,600
Speaker 3: start deportations that will see that.

426
00:25:17,720 --> 00:25:20,880
Speaker 1: I think you will start to see operations that are

427
00:25:20,960 --> 00:25:25,240
Speaker 1: meant to capture the public attention. So I think they

428
00:25:25,320 --> 00:25:28,359
Speaker 1: will say, here, give me a list of people with

429
00:25:28,480 --> 00:25:32,000
Speaker 1: criminal convictions, and give me a list of people with

430
00:25:32,160 --> 00:25:35,520
Speaker 1: deportation orders that have already been issued, and we're going

431
00:25:35,600 --> 00:25:39,000
Speaker 1: to start operations in big cities that are for the

432
00:25:39,080 --> 00:25:43,440
Speaker 1: purpose of finding those people and detaining them and putting

433
00:25:43,480 --> 00:25:46,240
Speaker 1: them in deportation proceedings. And so the idea will be

434
00:25:47,000 --> 00:25:51,000
Speaker 1: that by doing those operations and announcing them and putting

435
00:25:51,000 --> 00:25:54,560
Speaker 1: them in the press, and perhaps doing some things that

436
00:25:54,640 --> 00:25:58,679
Speaker 1: were more noticeable than in the past, well maybe instead

437
00:25:58,680 --> 00:26:01,320
Speaker 1: of going to the person's house, you go to the

438
00:26:01,320 --> 00:26:05,000
Speaker 1: person's workplace or to some other public place and pick

439
00:26:05,119 --> 00:26:09,080
Speaker 1: the person up. That would lead to sort of more

440
00:26:09,280 --> 00:26:13,080
Speaker 1: tension and nervousness in the communities that are affected by

441
00:26:13,080 --> 00:26:16,119
Speaker 1: these operations, so that people would start to say, well,

442
00:26:16,160 --> 00:26:18,880
Speaker 1: I can't live with this kind of stress. I'm going

443
00:26:18,920 --> 00:26:21,800
Speaker 1: to just leave the United States. And so I think

444
00:26:21,880 --> 00:26:23,959
Speaker 1: that's what you're going to see. I don't think you're

445
00:26:24,000 --> 00:26:27,320
Speaker 1: going to see millions of people being detained or any

446
00:26:27,320 --> 00:26:29,840
Speaker 1: of that. I don't think there's the infrastructure for it.

447
00:26:30,320 --> 00:26:34,879
Speaker 1: There's not the legal resources for this. But the idea is,

448
00:26:35,119 --> 00:26:39,320
Speaker 1: can certain operations be created that have enough publicity and

449
00:26:39,359 --> 00:26:42,920
Speaker 1: create enough nervousness that people will then decide that they

450
00:26:42,960 --> 00:26:45,040
Speaker 1: want to leave the United States.

451
00:26:45,480 --> 00:26:47,959
Speaker 3: I have a feeling the next four years there's going

452
00:26:48,040 --> 00:26:50,240
Speaker 3: to be a lot of immigration issues for you to

453
00:26:50,280 --> 00:26:54,040
Speaker 3: talk about. Leon, Thanks so much. That's Leon Fresco of

454
00:26:54,080 --> 00:26:58,360
Speaker 3: Holland and Knight coming up next. Justice Clarence Thomas appears

455
00:26:58,400 --> 00:27:02,840
Speaker 3: to be off the hook those ethical violations. This is Bloomberg.

456
00:27:04,400 --> 00:27:08,240
Speaker 3: Justice Clarence Thomas has been mired in controversy since Pro

457
00:27:08,400 --> 00:27:12,040
Speaker 3: public Are revealed in twenty twenty three that he accepted

458
00:27:12,119 --> 00:27:15,879
Speaker 3: luxury trips and gifts worth millions of dollars from a

459
00:27:15,960 --> 00:27:20,440
Speaker 3: GOP mega donor for decades, and now the federal Judiciary

460
00:27:20,520 --> 00:27:24,720
Speaker 3: has decided Thomas will not face a federal investigation of

461
00:27:24,840 --> 00:27:29,359
Speaker 3: ethics violations. The US Judicial Conference announced that it will

462
00:27:29,359 --> 00:27:34,000
Speaker 3: not refer allegations that Thomas may have violated ethics laws

463
00:27:34,119 --> 00:27:37,879
Speaker 3: to the Justice Department. The Conference also announced that it

464
00:27:37,920 --> 00:27:42,560
Speaker 3: will not refer allegations that Justice Katanji Brown Jackson failed

465
00:27:42,600 --> 00:27:47,080
Speaker 3: to report her husband's income from medical malpractice consulting fees.

466
00:27:47,480 --> 00:27:50,720
Speaker 3: Joining me is ethics law expert Stephen Gillers, a professor

467
00:27:50,720 --> 00:27:55,119
Speaker 3: at NYU Law School. In this letter, Judge Robert Conrad,

468
00:27:55,240 --> 00:27:59,240
Speaker 3: the director of the Administrative Office of the US Courts,

469
00:28:00,000 --> 00:28:04,119
Speaker 3: and the Judicial Conference does not superintend the justices of

470
00:28:04,160 --> 00:28:08,359
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court, only lower courts. Is that really the case?

471
00:28:09,000 --> 00:28:11,560
Speaker 4: No, it's not. And that's the most troubling part of

472
00:28:11,640 --> 00:28:17,280
Speaker 4: Conrad's letter, because that view means that no justice, not

473
00:28:17,480 --> 00:28:22,240
Speaker 4: only Thomas in this instance, is subject to referral by

474
00:28:22,320 --> 00:28:30,160
Speaker 4: the Federal Judicial Conference. I think that conrad conclusion is indefensible. Certainly,

475
00:28:30,200 --> 00:28:33,840
Speaker 4: it is not defended credibly, and that surprising in and

476
00:28:33,920 --> 00:28:37,480
Speaker 4: of itself. Remember how we got here. There's a prelude

477
00:28:37,520 --> 00:28:39,800
Speaker 4: to this, and for a long time there was no

478
00:28:40,280 --> 00:28:43,920
Speaker 4: code of ethics for the Supreme Court at all, and

479
00:28:43,960 --> 00:28:49,440
Speaker 4: then an adopted one in twenty three without an enforcement provision,

480
00:28:50,600 --> 00:28:55,960
Speaker 4: and various observers thought, well, maybe the Judicial Conference would

481
00:28:56,000 --> 00:28:59,840
Speaker 4: be the enforcer. Maybe there's some way to create or

482
00:29:00,000 --> 00:29:04,440
Speaker 4: authority or jurisdiction and the Conference to enforce the new

483
00:29:04,840 --> 00:29:08,160
Speaker 4: Supreme Court ethics code. But that never came to pass,

484
00:29:08,240 --> 00:29:12,240
Speaker 4: and so we have in that code a document that

485
00:29:12,320 --> 00:29:16,840
Speaker 4: is really aspirational only because a justice could violate it

486
00:29:16,920 --> 00:29:20,320
Speaker 4: clearly and still not be subject to any kind of

487
00:29:20,720 --> 00:29:24,920
Speaker 4: enforcement or sanction or repercussion. However, when we come to

488
00:29:25,000 --> 00:29:29,760
Speaker 4: the financial disclosures, we're in a different category altogether, because

489
00:29:29,960 --> 00:29:35,680
Speaker 4: Congress has said that the financial disclosure rules apply to

490
00:29:36,160 --> 00:29:41,200
Speaker 4: all judicial officers, including the Supreme Court. So we have

491
00:29:41,600 --> 00:29:48,480
Speaker 4: congressional authorization for other branches and agencies of government to

492
00:29:48,640 --> 00:29:54,760
Speaker 4: view justices as within the financial disclosure obligations. And then

493
00:29:54,880 --> 00:29:58,240
Speaker 4: Congress has also said in the Ethics and Government Debt

494
00:29:58,760 --> 00:30:04,720
Speaker 4: that when any of certain listed actors have reasonable cause

495
00:30:04,800 --> 00:30:11,680
Speaker 4: to believe that a judicial officer has willfully violated the

496
00:30:11,720 --> 00:30:20,240
Speaker 4: financial disclosure requirements, that person shall it's mandatory, shall report

497
00:30:20,880 --> 00:30:24,320
Speaker 4: the violation, or at least the reasonable cause to believe,

498
00:30:24,760 --> 00:30:28,760
Speaker 4: to the Attorney General. And that includes the judicial conference

499
00:30:28,800 --> 00:30:31,600
Speaker 4: a duty to report to the Attorney General when there's

500
00:30:31,680 --> 00:30:35,680
Speaker 4: reasonable cause to believe there's a willful violation. Now that

501
00:30:35,720 --> 00:30:40,800
Speaker 4: brings us to Thomas and his many receipts of bounty

502
00:30:41,320 --> 00:30:44,800
Speaker 4: from others during the course of his presence on the

503
00:30:44,840 --> 00:30:51,120
Speaker 4: Court and in reviewing the allegations of Senator Whitehouse and

504
00:30:51,320 --> 00:30:57,120
Speaker 4: Representative Johnson, Mister Conrad. Judge Conrad, and remarkably never says

505
00:30:57,720 --> 00:31:02,880
Speaker 4: that Thomas's conduct, has reviewed by the Conference across two years,

506
00:31:03,720 --> 00:31:08,120
Speaker 4: does not reveal a reasonable cause to believe that he

507
00:31:08,280 --> 00:31:14,440
Speaker 4: willfully violated the reporting obligations. It does not exonerate Thomas

508
00:31:14,480 --> 00:31:18,400
Speaker 4: from that charge. I mean, that would have been hard enough,

509
00:31:18,760 --> 00:31:19,440
Speaker 4: but it does not.

510
00:31:20,360 --> 00:31:24,880
Speaker 3: Yes, So, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said that the Judiciary's response

511
00:31:25,000 --> 00:31:30,240
Speaker 3: contains a number of inconsistencies and strange claims and doesn't

512
00:31:30,240 --> 00:31:34,480
Speaker 3: address whether there's reasonable cause to believe that Thomas wilfully

513
00:31:34,520 --> 00:31:36,000
Speaker 3: broke the disclosure law.

514
00:31:37,000 --> 00:31:41,840
Speaker 4: Rather, what Conrad says is, well, says three things. Well,

515
00:31:42,680 --> 00:31:44,960
Speaker 4: it's all been taken care of them, and Thomas is

516
00:31:45,000 --> 00:31:48,360
Speaker 4: in compliance. But he's not in compliance even apply from

517
00:31:48,440 --> 00:31:52,520
Speaker 4: the trips and the personal hospitality, there are other things

518
00:31:52,520 --> 00:31:57,560
Speaker 4: he did not report. The second, he says that anyway

519
00:31:57,960 --> 00:32:01,600
Speaker 4: the reporting obligation can the Attorney General does not apply

520
00:32:01,800 --> 00:32:04,840
Speaker 4: to justices, even though the two statutes were talking about

521
00:32:04,880 --> 00:32:09,840
Speaker 4: applies to justices. And for that proposition, he says, well,

522
00:32:10,400 --> 00:32:14,400
Speaker 4: one of the sentences in the Federal Code about reporting

523
00:32:14,520 --> 00:32:20,600
Speaker 4: refers to circuit judges and reporting to the judicial council

524
00:32:20,760 --> 00:32:25,200
Speaker 4: of a circuit or district judges. And given that sentence,

525
00:32:25,640 --> 00:32:28,160
Speaker 4: it must be that the Congress did not intend for

526
00:32:28,280 --> 00:32:31,680
Speaker 4: reporting of Supreme Court will for violations, which is a

527
00:32:31,720 --> 00:32:36,520
Speaker 4: non sequitur. If a lower court judge is guilty or

528
00:32:36,560 --> 00:32:39,960
Speaker 4: maybe guilty of will for violation, you report to this

529
00:32:40,080 --> 00:32:43,960
Speaker 4: circuit council, says the statute. It doesn't say you don't

530
00:32:44,000 --> 00:32:47,560
Speaker 4: report to the Attorney General. The Supreme Court justices are

531
00:32:47,640 --> 00:32:51,440
Speaker 4: not subject to judicial council, so you can't report to

532
00:32:51,480 --> 00:32:55,880
Speaker 4: the judicial council for a justice. But the sentences still

533
00:32:55,960 --> 00:33:01,600
Speaker 4: remains that the conference shall report bought reasonable cause to

534
00:33:01,640 --> 00:33:06,560
Speaker 4: believe willful violation. To Finally, Conrad seems to think that

535
00:33:06,680 --> 00:33:10,360
Speaker 4: the council just doesn't have power because it was not authorized,

536
00:33:10,400 --> 00:33:15,280
Speaker 4: specifically authorized in the statutes to report such findings of

537
00:33:15,440 --> 00:33:20,560
Speaker 4: reasonable cause to believe there was a willful violation. Now

538
00:33:20,840 --> 00:33:24,160
Speaker 4: this is a remarkable statement. The idea that a federal

539
00:33:24,200 --> 00:33:31,560
Speaker 4: agency needs the approval of Congress to report that a

540
00:33:31,680 --> 00:33:38,520
Speaker 4: federal official may have willfully violated a regulation is incomprehensible.

541
00:33:38,920 --> 00:33:45,080
Speaker 4: You don't need congressional authorization. One would hope that any

542
00:33:45,320 --> 00:33:51,120
Speaker 4: federal worker who has reason to believe that another federal

543
00:33:51,160 --> 00:33:56,880
Speaker 4: workers is willfully violating a federal statute that they could

544
00:33:56,920 --> 00:33:59,920
Speaker 4: report without going first to Congress and asking forced the

545
00:34:00,080 --> 00:34:05,280
Speaker 4: civic authority to report. So the idea that Conrad feels

546
00:34:05,440 --> 00:34:09,279
Speaker 4: that he is without power to report wrongdoing or a

547
00:34:09,320 --> 00:34:14,520
Speaker 4: possible wrongdoing because Congress didn't tell him to is quite

548
00:34:14,640 --> 00:34:18,840
Speaker 4: sad and troubling. It suggests that we may never get,

549
00:34:19,239 --> 00:34:25,080
Speaker 4: even for statutes that specifically recognize justices as within their ambit,

550
00:34:25,640 --> 00:34:31,440
Speaker 4: we may never get any kind of opportunity by an

551
00:34:31,440 --> 00:34:36,040
Speaker 4: outside body to review their conduct with a view toward

552
00:34:36,400 --> 00:34:40,040
Speaker 4: determining whether or not they behavior violated a law that

553
00:34:40,160 --> 00:34:45,120
Speaker 4: Congress passed. This aggravates the situation, but it seems like

554
00:34:45,160 --> 00:34:47,360
Speaker 4: there will be no place to go after this unless

555
00:34:47,400 --> 00:34:49,920
Speaker 4: Congress legislates, which is unlikely.

556
00:34:50,360 --> 00:34:53,160
Speaker 3: He also said that the request became moot when the

557
00:34:53,200 --> 00:34:57,920
Speaker 3: Democrats asked the ag Merrick Garland to appoint a special

558
00:34:58,000 --> 00:35:00,560
Speaker 3: counsel to investigate.

559
00:35:00,440 --> 00:35:04,080
Speaker 4: Right and there's a problem there too, because the conference

560
00:35:04,120 --> 00:35:07,759
Speaker 4: has spent two years looking into Thomas and perhaps Intulito.

561
00:35:08,520 --> 00:35:11,359
Speaker 4: Presumably in those two years they have gathered a lot

562
00:35:11,400 --> 00:35:16,680
Speaker 4: of information, information that they hope explains one of their

563
00:35:16,719 --> 00:35:21,560
Speaker 4: grounds for not reporting Thomas, but that information may be

564
00:35:21,680 --> 00:35:24,560
Speaker 4: valuable to the Attorney General. The Attorney General may get

565
00:35:24,600 --> 00:35:27,600
Speaker 4: a letter from white House and Johnson's asking for an

566
00:35:27,640 --> 00:35:31,040
Speaker 4: investigation or what have you. The white House and Johnson

567
00:35:31,120 --> 00:35:35,920
Speaker 4: don't have the information that Conrad has, and Conrad's not

568
00:35:36,000 --> 00:35:40,759
Speaker 4: sharing it because he says Congress didn't specifically authorize him

569
00:35:40,800 --> 00:35:43,960
Speaker 4: to do that. And so while it is true that

570
00:35:44,080 --> 00:35:49,000
Speaker 4: others can complain, they can't complain on the same factual record,

571
00:35:49,320 --> 00:35:53,360
Speaker 4: the record that Conrad will have accumulated over two years.

572
00:35:53,640 --> 00:35:56,840
Speaker 4: That could help in a decision whether or not the

573
00:35:56,920 --> 00:36:00,920
Speaker 4: Attorney General should invoke the authority to see a civil

574
00:36:01,040 --> 00:36:04,600
Speaker 4: remedy for wilful violation of the law.

575
00:36:05,160 --> 00:36:09,160
Speaker 3: We're talking about decades of travel and gifts, etc. And

576
00:36:09,560 --> 00:36:12,839
Speaker 3: he only has to report them. He's allowed to take them,

577
00:36:13,200 --> 00:36:13,879
Speaker 3: but he just has.

578
00:36:13,800 --> 00:36:16,919
Speaker 4: To report them. That's right. And you know, when people

579
00:36:17,000 --> 00:36:20,000
Speaker 4: were talking about the enforcement of the new Supreme Court

580
00:36:20,000 --> 00:36:26,120
Speaker 4: Ethics Code, behind that complaint was the hope that enforcement

581
00:36:26,160 --> 00:36:28,680
Speaker 4: could lead to some kind of sanction, because if it cannot,

582
00:36:28,760 --> 00:36:31,160
Speaker 4: what good is it. Even if the sanction is only

583
00:36:31,200 --> 00:36:34,759
Speaker 4: a public document disagreeing with what the justice did or

584
00:36:34,800 --> 00:36:38,960
Speaker 4: did not do. This is totally different. This is only reporting.

585
00:36:39,040 --> 00:36:42,400
Speaker 4: No one's asking the Judicial conference to visit a penalty

586
00:36:42,680 --> 00:36:47,480
Speaker 4: on Thomas or others who willfully failed to report. The

587
00:36:47,520 --> 00:36:52,560
Speaker 4: penalty in the statute is in the authorization of the

588
00:36:52,560 --> 00:36:55,240
Speaker 4: Attorney General to bring a civil or even a criminal

589
00:36:55,280 --> 00:37:00,440
Speaker 4: action for willful failure to report, not a finding. That

590
00:37:00,640 --> 00:37:04,720
Speaker 4: is Conrad doesn't have to make a finding that anyone

591
00:37:04,840 --> 00:37:07,920
Speaker 4: violated the law. He just has to make a finding

592
00:37:08,080 --> 00:37:11,080
Speaker 4: that he has reasonable cause to believe that there was

593
00:37:11,120 --> 00:37:12,320
Speaker 4: a willful violation.

594
00:37:13,360 --> 00:37:18,440
Speaker 3: So the referral for Thomas came from two Democrats in Congress.

595
00:37:18,719 --> 00:37:23,320
Speaker 3: There was also a referral for Justice Katanji Brown Jackson

596
00:37:23,680 --> 00:37:27,640
Speaker 3: from a conservative legal group for not reporting her husband's

597
00:37:27,680 --> 00:37:30,000
Speaker 3: medical malpractice consultations.

598
00:37:30,440 --> 00:37:36,000
Speaker 4: Yeah, this is remarkable because this is one instance, one instance,

599
00:37:36,120 --> 00:37:40,160
Speaker 4: and just compare that to Thomas, one instance in which

600
00:37:40,800 --> 00:37:46,400
Speaker 4: relatively knew justice failed to report a spouse's compensation and

601
00:37:46,480 --> 00:37:53,160
Speaker 4: then corrected it. There's no parallel between the recidivist behavior

602
00:37:53,320 --> 00:37:57,719
Speaker 4: of Thomas. We still don't know if the reporting that

603
00:37:57,760 --> 00:38:00,880
Speaker 4: Thomas has done is complete. I think we know that

604
00:38:00,920 --> 00:38:03,640
Speaker 4: it is not complete as regards certain things other than

605
00:38:03,719 --> 00:38:09,520
Speaker 4: personal hospitality, so comparing Jackson to Thomas makes no sense.

606
00:38:09,600 --> 00:38:12,919
Speaker 4: It's just a captive to say, well, your side does

607
00:38:12,960 --> 00:38:15,080
Speaker 4: the same thing, which is ridiculous.

608
00:38:15,840 --> 00:38:18,880
Speaker 3: Let me ask you about the Chief Justice's year end report,

609
00:38:19,480 --> 00:38:24,480
Speaker 3: and he's calling criticism of judges and justices and protests

610
00:38:24,520 --> 00:38:29,440
Speaker 3: outside justices houses intimidation of the judiciary.

611
00:38:30,000 --> 00:38:34,120
Speaker 4: Well, it's certainly going to a justice' house is troubling.

612
00:38:34,480 --> 00:38:38,320
Speaker 4: The family is their children are there. I think the

613
00:38:38,360 --> 00:38:44,759
Speaker 4: federal judiciary has an interest in publicly criticizing ticketing or

614
00:38:44,880 --> 00:38:50,080
Speaker 4: demonstrations before a justice's house, but certainly not in harsh

615
00:38:50,200 --> 00:38:53,160
Speaker 4: criticism of a justices behavior. That's what it's all about.

616
00:38:53,239 --> 00:38:57,160
Speaker 4: That comes with the territory and critics of a particular

617
00:38:57,400 --> 00:39:02,400
Speaker 4: justice for his or her opinion who aggressively in print,

618
00:39:02,440 --> 00:39:07,280
Speaker 4: for example, criticized that justice. That's what the petition clause

619
00:39:07,360 --> 00:39:10,040
Speaker 4: of the First Amendment is all about.

620
00:39:10,200 --> 00:39:13,239
Speaker 3: The Supreme Court, as you know, the latest Gallup poll

621
00:39:13,320 --> 00:39:14,880
Speaker 3: is at an all time low. And I keep on

622
00:39:14,960 --> 00:39:17,279
Speaker 3: saying every time his new pole all time low because

623
00:39:17,280 --> 00:39:18,960
Speaker 3: he keeps getting lower and lower.

624
00:39:19,120 --> 00:39:20,920
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, none of.

625
00:39:20,880 --> 00:39:24,720
Speaker 3: This will help people to have more confidence in the court.

626
00:39:25,080 --> 00:39:27,880
Speaker 4: No, but let me be an optimist for a second

627
00:39:27,880 --> 00:39:31,760
Speaker 4: okay against my better judgment. The Three Court first stat

628
00:39:31,800 --> 00:39:35,319
Speaker 4: in seventeen ninety. Justice Thomas came on the Court in

629
00:39:35,360 --> 00:39:39,120
Speaker 4: the nineteen nineties, two hundred plus years later. Between seventeen

630
00:39:39,239 --> 00:39:44,760
Speaker 4: ninety and nineteen ninety, we did not have a serious problem.

631
00:39:44,960 --> 00:39:48,120
Speaker 4: Fordis is the most obvious one in the last seventy

632
00:39:48,239 --> 00:39:52,960
Speaker 4: five years, and that was comparatively minor. Justice Fortis's behavior.

633
00:39:53,400 --> 00:39:58,000
Speaker 4: Justice Douglas created a lot of waves, but also comparatively

634
00:39:58,080 --> 00:40:00,879
Speaker 4: minor compared to what we have today. What we have

635
00:40:01,040 --> 00:40:05,440
Speaker 4: today is ninety percent a result of the behavior of

636
00:40:05,560 --> 00:40:09,800
Speaker 4: one man, Clarence Thomas and to a much lesser extent,

637
00:40:10,280 --> 00:40:14,319
Speaker 4: Justice Alito. Both are in their seventies. Even if we

638
00:40:14,360 --> 00:40:18,520
Speaker 4: do nothing, time will change the composition of the Court

639
00:40:18,640 --> 00:40:21,480
Speaker 4: and they will no longer be on it. And so

640
00:40:21,840 --> 00:40:26,600
Speaker 4: my optimistic wish is that once they're gone, and especially

641
00:40:26,640 --> 00:40:31,640
Speaker 4: once Thomas is gone, will revert to the relatively quiescent

642
00:40:31,840 --> 00:40:37,400
Speaker 4: era between seventeen ninety and nineteen ninety. That Thomas is

643
00:40:37,400 --> 00:40:41,600
Speaker 4: a one man reputation destroyer for the Court. He seems

644
00:40:41,600 --> 00:40:44,600
Speaker 4: to have no sense of responsibility and no sense of shame.

645
00:40:44,880 --> 00:40:47,440
Speaker 4: But most of the problem the Court is facing now

646
00:40:47,560 --> 00:40:50,360
Speaker 4: is a product of his behavior if we're talking about

647
00:40:50,440 --> 00:40:56,080
Speaker 4: behavioral justices. Other reasons the Court is suffering is because

648
00:40:56,560 --> 00:41:01,560
Speaker 4: of its decisions, most particularly the DBS decision, and not

649
00:41:01,640 --> 00:41:04,480
Speaker 4: only there's no way to change that, that's inherent in

650
00:41:04,560 --> 00:41:10,280
Speaker 4: the process. During the Warren era, the Court suffered reputational

651
00:41:10,400 --> 00:41:14,400
Speaker 4: hit from the right because of the decisions Miranda and

652
00:41:14,480 --> 00:41:18,800
Speaker 4: others they had the warrant Court adopted. That's their job.

653
00:41:19,080 --> 00:41:23,000
Speaker 4: I mean, we may disagree with what gor Citro Kavanaugh believe,

654
00:41:23,640 --> 00:41:26,560
Speaker 4: but they're doing their job. There's no reason to believe

655
00:41:26,680 --> 00:41:33,560
Speaker 4: their conclusions in those cases are improper as their influence improperly.

656
00:41:34,040 --> 00:41:36,480
Speaker 4: They're saying what they think. We may not like what

657
00:41:36,520 --> 00:41:39,400
Speaker 4: they think, but that's what they're doing and it's what

658
00:41:39,440 --> 00:41:43,520
Speaker 4: we want them to honestly do, although some might prefer

659
00:41:43,840 --> 00:41:45,480
Speaker 4: that they reach a different result.

660
00:41:45,840 --> 00:41:49,280
Speaker 3: Always a pleasure. Thanks so much. That's Professor Steven Gillers

661
00:41:49,320 --> 00:41:52,399
Speaker 3: of NYU Law School, And that's it for this edition

662
00:41:52,440 --> 00:41:55,080
Speaker 3: of the Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get

663
00:41:55,080 --> 00:41:58,239
Speaker 3: the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You

664
00:41:58,280 --> 00:42:02,360
Speaker 3: can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www

665
00:42:02,480 --> 00:42:06,720
Speaker 3: dot Bloomberg dot com. Slash podcast slash law, and remember

666
00:42:06,800 --> 00:42:09,759
Speaker 3: to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at

667
00:42:09,760 --> 00:42:13,239
Speaker 3: ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm Jim Grosso and you're

668
00:42:13,360 --> 00:42:14,560
Speaker 3: listening to Bloomberg