1
00:00:03,520 --> 00:00:07,040
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

2
00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:09,680
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

3
00:00:09,720 --> 00:00:12,200
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more

4
00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:16,160
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud

5
00:00:16,280 --> 00:00:19,920
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. The Supreme Court

6
00:00:20,000 --> 00:00:23,880
Speaker 1: justices are on vacation until the first Monday November, as

7
00:00:23,960 --> 00:00:26,760
Speaker 1: legal analysts view the last term and try to glean

8
00:00:26,920 --> 00:00:30,520
Speaker 1: patterns and trends. Joining me to do just that is

9
00:00:30,600 --> 00:00:34,080
Speaker 1: Constitutional law professor Stephen Flattock of the University of Texas

10
00:00:34,080 --> 00:00:37,239
Speaker 1: School of Law. So Steve, the cases that garnered the

11
00:00:37,280 --> 00:00:40,600
Speaker 1: headlines last week, we're about partisan Jerryman during in the

12
00:00:40,680 --> 00:00:44,760
Speaker 1: census citizenship question, But lurking in the shadows, so to speak,

13
00:00:44,920 --> 00:00:48,800
Speaker 1: was a case on administrative law, not a very sexy

14
00:00:48,960 --> 00:00:51,840
Speaker 1: area of law, but a case that tells a lot. Yeah.

15
00:00:51,840 --> 00:00:56,080
Speaker 1: So the cases called kaisar versus Welcome. Ka is actually

16
00:00:56,120 --> 00:00:59,680
Speaker 1: a marine veteran who was basically embroiled in this dispute

17
00:00:59,680 --> 00:01:03,360
Speaker 1: with v A over the denial of benefits rising out

18
00:01:03,360 --> 00:01:07,160
Speaker 1: of his PTSD, and the actual legal question June was

19
00:01:07,160 --> 00:01:11,199
Speaker 1: whether the v A was entitled to deference an interpreting

20
00:01:11,280 --> 00:01:15,920
Speaker 1: ambiguous language in its own regulations. The Federal Circuit, relying

21
00:01:16,040 --> 00:01:19,319
Speaker 1: on prior court precedent, had said yes, and the case

22
00:01:19,360 --> 00:01:22,400
Speaker 1: had been viewed I think pretty widely as an opportunity

23
00:01:22,480 --> 00:01:25,520
Speaker 1: to narrow, if not get rid of that precedent, basically

24
00:01:25,560 --> 00:01:29,600
Speaker 1: to reduce the amount of deference the administrative agencies provide

25
00:01:29,920 --> 00:01:32,640
Speaker 1: or art received from federal courts and the Supreme Court,

26
00:01:32,920 --> 00:01:36,840
Speaker 1: largely because of a narrow vote by Chief Justice John

27
00:01:36,920 --> 00:01:40,880
Speaker 1: Roberts declined to overturn the relevant precedent a case called

28
00:01:40,920 --> 00:01:44,280
Speaker 1: our but now did pretty sharply, so that you know

29
00:01:44,319 --> 00:01:47,680
Speaker 1: it's going to be a lot less likely going forward

30
00:01:48,120 --> 00:01:50,600
Speaker 1: that agencies like the v A will will win in

31
00:01:50,720 --> 00:01:53,560
Speaker 1: context in which their case turns on whether their interpretation

32
00:01:53,640 --> 00:01:57,280
Speaker 1: prevails over a court's interpretation. But June, I think Kaiser

33
00:01:57,360 --> 00:01:59,800
Speaker 1: is important not because of the result, but because I

34
00:01:59,840 --> 00:02:03,040
Speaker 1: think we saw from the four justices who concurred in

35
00:02:03,080 --> 00:02:05,200
Speaker 1: part and the sent it in part, that they really

36
00:02:05,200 --> 00:02:08,640
Speaker 1: would go much much further. I mean, Justice Gorsages sent

37
00:02:08,760 --> 00:02:11,320
Speaker 1: an opinion if it received a fifth vote, I think

38
00:02:11,360 --> 00:02:15,600
Speaker 1: would be a pretty radical reimagine him of exactly what

39
00:02:15,760 --> 00:02:19,200
Speaker 1: federal administrative agencies are allowed to do and more importantly,

40
00:02:19,240 --> 00:02:22,320
Speaker 1: what they're not allowed to do. So, Chief Justice John Roberts,

41
00:02:22,360 --> 00:02:25,600
Speaker 1: as you mentioned the deciding vote, he joined the liberal

42
00:02:25,680 --> 00:02:29,840
Speaker 1: justice solely on that basis of starring decisives, which is

43
00:02:30,120 --> 00:02:33,720
Speaker 1: precedent should be respected. Do you believe he did that

44
00:02:33,880 --> 00:02:37,320
Speaker 1: because he didn't want another case there are two cases

45
00:02:37,400 --> 00:02:40,880
Speaker 1: where they overturned precedent that he didn't want another case

46
00:02:40,880 --> 00:02:43,880
Speaker 1: where that happened and so the image of the court,

47
00:02:44,080 --> 00:02:49,919
Speaker 1: or because he believes in the fundamentals of the majority opinion.

48
00:02:50,560 --> 00:02:52,519
Speaker 1: It's a good question, June. I'm not sure. I'm not

49
00:02:52,560 --> 00:02:54,520
Speaker 1: sure I know the answer. I mean, I think, you know,

50
00:02:54,600 --> 00:02:57,480
Speaker 1: for the Chief, it's more likely that that was a

51
00:02:57,600 --> 00:03:00,320
Speaker 1: sort of a sickly something to rely upon. You know,

52
00:03:00,360 --> 00:03:02,720
Speaker 1: he didn't really sort of explain his own views in

53
00:03:02,800 --> 00:03:05,360
Speaker 1: much detail. I mean, he wrote a short, deeper statement,

54
00:03:05,440 --> 00:03:07,720
Speaker 1: but I think, you know, perhaps the larger point here

55
00:03:07,760 --> 00:03:09,400
Speaker 1: is that for the Chief, and this is what he

56
00:03:09,480 --> 00:03:12,160
Speaker 1: said in his separate opinion, he didn't see that much

57
00:03:12,240 --> 00:03:16,560
Speaker 1: daylight between Justice Kagan's opinion and the opinion to Justice

58
00:03:16,600 --> 00:03:19,600
Speaker 1: Course that wrote nominally in behalf of the dissenters. You know, June,

59
00:03:19,680 --> 00:03:21,480
Speaker 1: that that may be right when the case like that

60
00:03:21,480 --> 00:03:23,200
Speaker 1: guess to the Supreme Court. I think there's a lot

61
00:03:23,200 --> 00:03:26,880
Speaker 1: of daylight between an opinion that narrows this kind of

62
00:03:26,880 --> 00:03:29,200
Speaker 1: deference but still leaves it on the books and one

63
00:03:29,200 --> 00:03:31,639
Speaker 1: that wipes away all together when we're talking about how

64
00:03:31,680 --> 00:03:34,440
Speaker 1: lower court judges are supposed to deal with future cases.

65
00:03:34,880 --> 00:03:36,800
Speaker 1: And I think to me the important part here about

66
00:03:36,800 --> 00:03:39,280
Speaker 1: the Chief is, you know, yes, he sort of joined

67
00:03:39,320 --> 00:03:43,320
Speaker 1: the liberals here, but he also joined Justice Gorse as

68
00:03:43,400 --> 00:03:46,480
Speaker 1: his dissent in the gun Be case about the non

69
00:03:46,520 --> 00:03:50,320
Speaker 1: delegation doctrine and about Congress's power or lack thereof, to

70
00:03:50,480 --> 00:03:54,840
Speaker 1: delegate legislative and judicial authority to administrative agencies. You know,

71
00:03:54,920 --> 00:03:56,480
Speaker 1: Justice course is just desent in that case is a

72
00:03:56,480 --> 00:04:01,760
Speaker 1: pretty radical and fundamental assault and modern administrative law. And

73
00:04:01,760 --> 00:04:04,560
Speaker 1: if the Chief is fully on board with where gorsages

74
00:04:04,600 --> 00:04:07,600
Speaker 1: in that case, you know, I think his vote in

75
00:04:07,800 --> 00:04:11,520
Speaker 1: kais or becomes much less important going forward, especially if

76
00:04:11,520 --> 00:04:13,520
Speaker 1: they're you know, as soon a majority of Justice to

77
00:04:13,640 --> 00:04:17,159
Speaker 1: adopt the Gorse has just sent in Gundhi for district

78
00:04:17,200 --> 00:04:21,800
Speaker 1: court judges. How has this term changed administrative law if

79
00:04:21,839 --> 00:04:25,279
Speaker 1: at all the interpretations? Well, I mean, I think the

80
00:04:25,320 --> 00:04:27,840
Speaker 1: short answer is it's changed it a little bit, but

81
00:04:27,920 --> 00:04:31,200
Speaker 1: it is portending massive changes coming down the pike. And

82
00:04:31,240 --> 00:04:34,000
Speaker 1: so I think in the short term, the circuit judges

83
00:04:34,000 --> 00:04:36,320
Speaker 1: who are the ones who most often grapple with these

84
00:04:36,480 --> 00:04:40,000
Speaker 1: hard questions of administrative law and sort of trying to

85
00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:43,040
Speaker 1: figure out what to do with vague or ambiguous language

86
00:04:43,320 --> 00:04:46,920
Speaker 1: and agency regulations and agency statutes. I think the circuit

87
00:04:46,960 --> 00:04:48,599
Speaker 1: judges are for the moment, you know, going to be

88
00:04:48,600 --> 00:04:52,440
Speaker 1: taking their queue front Chief Justice Roberts and basically given

89
00:04:52,480 --> 00:04:56,839
Speaker 1: agencies less but not zero difference in these matters, taking

90
00:04:56,920 --> 00:04:58,800
Speaker 1: a little more seriously the idea that they have an

91
00:04:58,839 --> 00:05:02,480
Speaker 1: independent obligation even when the language is ambigious. But you know, June,

92
00:05:02,520 --> 00:05:04,279
Speaker 1: that's just in the short term. I think the real

93
00:05:04,360 --> 00:05:07,640
Speaker 1: question is whether there's going to be a fifth vote

94
00:05:07,640 --> 00:05:11,080
Speaker 1: in the long term for the position Justice Gorsuch espoused

95
00:05:11,120 --> 00:05:14,200
Speaker 1: in Gundhi. In that case, Justice Kavanaugh did not participate

96
00:05:14,240 --> 00:05:17,359
Speaker 1: because it was argued right before he was confirmed, and

97
00:05:17,400 --> 00:05:21,000
Speaker 1: Justice Aldo, who cast the fifth vote in favor of

98
00:05:21,080 --> 00:05:24,120
Speaker 1: the judgment, that he was only doing that because there

99
00:05:24,200 --> 00:05:26,479
Speaker 1: wasn't a full court. So if we assume a leado

100
00:05:26,560 --> 00:05:28,880
Speaker 1: would join Gorsuch as the scent in the future case,

101
00:05:29,200 --> 00:05:31,400
Speaker 1: and if we assume that, I think we can that

102
00:05:31,560 --> 00:05:34,000
Speaker 1: Justice Kavanaugh would be deeply sympathetic to that as well.

103
00:05:34,360 --> 00:05:36,200
Speaker 1: I think the real story of this term from an

104
00:05:36,240 --> 00:05:39,000
Speaker 1: administrative law perspective is that the writing is on the

105
00:05:39,080 --> 00:05:42,919
Speaker 1: wall for a pretty stunning change and shift in the

106
00:05:43,000 --> 00:05:46,920
Speaker 1: relationship between federal courts and federal administrative agencies. It's not

107
00:05:46,960 --> 00:05:48,960
Speaker 1: going to happen tomorrow, but I think it could happen

108
00:05:49,000 --> 00:05:53,400
Speaker 1: pretty soon. This is the first term since Kavanaugh succeeded

109
00:05:53,480 --> 00:05:58,120
Speaker 1: swing vote Justice Anthony Kennedy. There were only two decisions

110
00:05:58,160 --> 00:06:02,960
Speaker 1: that explicitly overturned press since But did Conservatives gain with

111
00:06:03,040 --> 00:06:06,839
Speaker 1: that change in justices? Well, I don't think there's any question.

112
00:06:06,880 --> 00:06:08,360
Speaker 1: I mean, I think we could point to a lot

113
00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:10,920
Speaker 1: of examples June, but the one that really jumps out

114
00:06:10,960 --> 00:06:13,520
Speaker 1: to me is the partisan gerry Mandarin case the Supreme

115
00:06:13,520 --> 00:06:17,080
Speaker 1: Court decided last Thursday. So in root O versus common Cause,

116
00:06:17,160 --> 00:06:19,479
Speaker 1: you have Chief Justice Roberts writing for a five four

117
00:06:19,560 --> 00:06:24,520
Speaker 1: majority that challenges to severe partisan jerry mandarin. Even if

118
00:06:24,520 --> 00:06:27,920
Speaker 1: we think that the severe partisan gerryman is unconstitutional, are

119
00:06:28,000 --> 00:06:31,320
Speaker 1: not justiciabal, They're not the kinds of disputes that the

120
00:06:31,360 --> 00:06:34,240
Speaker 1: federal courts have the power and ability to resolve. And

121
00:06:34,240 --> 00:06:37,560
Speaker 1: this is a huge deal because previously the Court had

122
00:06:37,600 --> 00:06:40,560
Speaker 1: actually split on whether these disputes could go ahead, on

123
00:06:40,560 --> 00:06:44,320
Speaker 1: whether federal courts could hear them, with four justices saying no,

124
00:06:45,000 --> 00:06:48,960
Speaker 1: four justician yes, and Justice Kennedy basically hanging out in

125
00:06:49,000 --> 00:06:52,000
Speaker 1: the middle and saying, I'm not yet convinced. He wrote

126
00:06:52,000 --> 00:06:54,799
Speaker 1: in two thousand and four that we can handle these cases,

127
00:06:54,839 --> 00:06:56,880
Speaker 1: but I'm not yet convinced that we can't. And what

128
00:06:56,960 --> 00:06:58,919
Speaker 1: we see in the ruling from last Thursday is the

129
00:06:58,960 --> 00:07:02,160
Speaker 1: difference that Kavanaugh makes, where, you know, without writing separately,

130
00:07:02,200 --> 00:07:05,400
Speaker 1: he signs on in full to to Justice roberts opinion,

131
00:07:05,560 --> 00:07:08,520
Speaker 1: basically saying the federal courts have nothing to do with

132
00:07:08,560 --> 00:07:12,080
Speaker 1: partisan gerrymander and going forward June, that's an enormous decision

133
00:07:12,120 --> 00:07:14,640
Speaker 1: with regard to what it's going to mean for redrawing

134
00:07:14,680 --> 00:07:17,400
Speaker 1: of district maps in the coming years, and it's one

135
00:07:17,400 --> 00:07:19,440
Speaker 1: that I think would not have been possible if Anthony

136
00:07:19,560 --> 00:07:22,760
Speaker 1: Kennedy were still on the court. Is Chief Justice John

137
00:07:22,840 --> 00:07:25,200
Speaker 1: Roberts the new swing vote? Oh, I don't think there's

138
00:07:25,200 --> 00:07:28,080
Speaker 1: any question looking at this term that with the exception

139
00:07:28,120 --> 00:07:31,080
Speaker 1: of maybe criminal cases where it looks more and more

140
00:07:31,160 --> 00:07:33,559
Speaker 1: like Justice Gorse, which is going to be the most

141
00:07:33,600 --> 00:07:37,080
Speaker 1: likely possibility for a stiff vote for criminal defendants on

142
00:07:37,200 --> 00:07:40,640
Speaker 1: the big hot button socially divisive cases. To Justice Roberts

143
00:07:40,640 --> 00:07:43,120
Speaker 1: is absolutely the swing vote. Now that doesn't make him

144
00:07:43,120 --> 00:07:45,360
Speaker 1: a moderate. I mean, I think there's a difference between,

145
00:07:45,680 --> 00:07:47,840
Speaker 1: you know, being the swing vote and being as Justice

146
00:07:47,920 --> 00:07:50,800
Speaker 1: Kennedy was often a moderate. But it does mean that

147
00:07:50,920 --> 00:07:54,080
Speaker 1: a lot of these doctrines, our rights and liberties, all

148
00:07:54,080 --> 00:07:55,760
Speaker 1: of this it is going. It's forn on where chiefs

149
00:07:55,760 --> 00:07:58,040
Speaker 1: defice Roberts comes down. Thank you so much, Steve that

150
00:07:58,120 --> 00:08:01,320
Speaker 1: Stephen Bladdock, Professor at the Universe of Texas School of Law.

151
00:08:04,040 --> 00:08:07,000
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can

152
00:08:07,040 --> 00:08:10,760
Speaker 1: subscribe and listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

153
00:08:10,840 --> 00:08:14,760
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso.

154
00:08:15,200 --> 00:08:16,520
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg