1 00:00:02,880 --> 00:00:07,120 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosseo from Bloomberg Radio. 2 00:00:08,440 --> 00:00:12,200 Speaker 2: Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin became well known back in 3 00:00:12,280 --> 00:00:15,600 Speaker 2: two thousand and eight as the late John McCain's vice 4 00:00:15,680 --> 00:00:19,280 Speaker 2: presidential running mate. She also became well known for a 5 00:00:19,320 --> 00:00:23,960 Speaker 2: series of verbal slips, gaffes, and generally cringeworthy moments. 6 00:00:24,360 --> 00:00:27,400 Speaker 3: There are next door neighbors, and you can actually see 7 00:00:27,600 --> 00:00:31,560 Speaker 3: Russia from land here in Alaska. Obviously got to. 8 00:00:31,560 --> 00:00:33,280 Speaker 1: Stand with arden North Korean allies. 9 00:00:33,320 --> 00:00:37,000 Speaker 4: We're bound to by trees, bound by Yeah. 10 00:00:37,400 --> 00:00:40,760 Speaker 3: I told Congress, thanks, but no thanks for that bridge 11 00:00:40,760 --> 00:00:42,320 Speaker 3: to nowhere up in Alaska. 12 00:00:42,720 --> 00:00:46,840 Speaker 2: Since then, Palin's star has gradually faded, although the spotlight 13 00:00:46,920 --> 00:00:50,200 Speaker 2: returned in twenty seventeen when she sued The New York 14 00:00:50,240 --> 00:00:54,480 Speaker 2: Times for defamation. But this week, for the second time, 15 00:00:54,840 --> 00:00:58,960 Speaker 2: a Manhattan jury found that the Times did not defame Palin. 16 00:00:59,480 --> 00:01:03,080 Speaker 2: Joining me is an expert in First Amendment law. Samantha Barbis, 17 00:01:03,120 --> 00:01:06,279 Speaker 2: a professor of law at the University of Iowa College 18 00:01:06,319 --> 00:01:09,120 Speaker 2: of Law, tell us why Pale ensued the Times. 19 00:01:09,720 --> 00:01:13,760 Speaker 4: So this story goes back to twenty eleven, when there 20 00:01:14,040 --> 00:01:19,680 Speaker 4: was a tragic shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords in Arizona, 21 00:01:19,920 --> 00:01:24,920 Speaker 4: and six years later there was another tragic shooting at 22 00:01:25,040 --> 00:01:30,280 Speaker 4: a baseball game in which various Republican politicians were participating 23 00:01:30,640 --> 00:01:34,800 Speaker 4: and the congressman was hit. And the day after that, 24 00:01:34,840 --> 00:01:38,760 Speaker 4: The New York Times ran an editorial in which it 25 00:01:38,880 --> 00:01:44,080 Speaker 4: suggested that there was a link between kind of violent 26 00:01:44,280 --> 00:01:49,080 Speaker 4: political environment that various people were promoting and these tragic 27 00:01:49,200 --> 00:01:54,320 Speaker 4: mass shootings. In particular, it pointed to a digital graphic 28 00:01:54,440 --> 00:01:58,200 Speaker 4: that had been produced by Sarah Palin's Political Action Committee 29 00:01:58,520 --> 00:02:00,760 Speaker 4: I think back in two thousand eleves than around the 30 00:02:00,800 --> 00:02:05,680 Speaker 4: time of the Arizona shooting, and that graphic used crosshairs 31 00:02:05,760 --> 00:02:11,040 Speaker 4: to target various congressional districts that I guess Palin was 32 00:02:11,200 --> 00:02:15,240 Speaker 4: interested in focusing on, interested in having her campaign focus 33 00:02:15,280 --> 00:02:18,760 Speaker 4: on these democratic political districts. But The New York Times 34 00:02:18,760 --> 00:02:22,359 Speaker 4: suggested that that was actually kind of an incitement to violence, 35 00:02:22,520 --> 00:02:27,080 Speaker 4: the use of crosshairs and kind of inciting people to 36 00:02:27,160 --> 00:02:32,040 Speaker 4: take dicious action against their political enemies. And so the 37 00:02:32,120 --> 00:02:36,720 Speaker 4: Times effectively linked that graphics to the shooting of Gavin 38 00:02:36,760 --> 00:02:41,120 Speaker 4: Gifford in Arizona, and Sarah Palin said that this was false, 39 00:02:41,639 --> 00:02:44,800 Speaker 4: that her Political Action Committee had nothing to do with 40 00:02:45,000 --> 00:02:49,200 Speaker 4: the shooting, and that her reputation was injured, she was defamed, 41 00:02:49,639 --> 00:02:52,240 Speaker 4: and that's the origin of her libel claim against The 42 00:02:52,280 --> 00:02:53,079 Speaker 4: New York Times. 43 00:02:53,320 --> 00:02:56,440 Speaker 2: This legal fight has been going on for eight years now, 44 00:02:56,760 --> 00:02:59,120 Speaker 2: and this is the second time that a jury has 45 00:02:59,560 --> 00:03:03,880 Speaker 2: heard the case and ruled against her. What happened the first. 46 00:03:03,600 --> 00:03:08,000 Speaker 4: Time, so the first time this was in twenty twenty two. 47 00:03:08,760 --> 00:03:14,000 Speaker 4: And importantly, the standard here is actual malice. So because 48 00:03:14,040 --> 00:03:18,360 Speaker 4: Sarah Palin is a public figure, she had to show 49 00:03:18,520 --> 00:03:23,200 Speaker 4: that the false statement was made with reckless disregarding the truth, 50 00:03:23,280 --> 00:03:25,640 Speaker 4: so that the Times either knew the statement was false 51 00:03:25,639 --> 00:03:28,280 Speaker 4: and published in any way, or had really strong reason 52 00:03:28,360 --> 00:03:32,440 Speaker 4: to believe that the statement was untrue. And during the 53 00:03:32,480 --> 00:03:36,160 Speaker 4: trial the evidence was presented about what the Time opinion 54 00:03:36,200 --> 00:03:40,200 Speaker 4: page editor knew and did not know when this editorial 55 00:03:40,400 --> 00:03:46,000 Speaker 4: was issued. And the judge, Judge Raycoff, at the close 56 00:03:46,040 --> 00:03:50,960 Speaker 4: of the trial suggested that even if the jury found 57 00:03:51,280 --> 00:03:56,080 Speaker 4: for Sarah Palin, he would set aside the decision. And 58 00:03:57,000 --> 00:04:02,320 Speaker 4: while the jury was deliberating currently, they were notified of 59 00:04:02,520 --> 00:04:05,920 Speaker 4: Judge Bracoff's pronouncement that he would satisfy the verdict, and 60 00:04:06,200 --> 00:04:09,280 Speaker 4: some of them even got push notifications on their phones 61 00:04:09,320 --> 00:04:12,720 Speaker 4: about this. They obviously found in favor of the Times, 62 00:04:12,880 --> 00:04:19,920 Speaker 4: and Sarah Palin appealed, suggesting that these procedural irregularities narrated 63 00:04:20,040 --> 00:04:23,120 Speaker 4: a new trial, and that's why we had the trial 64 00:04:23,600 --> 00:04:25,279 Speaker 4: that concluded a couple of days ago. 65 00:04:26,279 --> 00:04:29,760 Speaker 2: The person in charge of the Times opinion section admitted 66 00:04:29,760 --> 00:04:33,080 Speaker 2: he'd made a mistake, said he acted quickly to rectify it. 67 00:04:33,400 --> 00:04:37,400 Speaker 2: So was the main question for the jury whether he 68 00:04:37,480 --> 00:04:39,880 Speaker 2: acted with reckless disregard for the truth? 69 00:04:40,279 --> 00:04:44,880 Speaker 4: Yeah, So, again the issue was what did the Times 70 00:04:45,120 --> 00:04:49,039 Speaker 4: editor know at the time he made the decision to 71 00:04:49,279 --> 00:04:53,520 Speaker 4: publish this editorial? Did he know that these statements were false, 72 00:04:53,600 --> 00:04:58,120 Speaker 4: connecting Palin to the shooting? Did he have strong reason 73 00:04:58,240 --> 00:05:01,600 Speaker 4: to believe that the statements were fall and nevertheless allow 74 00:05:01,720 --> 00:05:05,120 Speaker 4: them to be issued. And so it's the Times argument 75 00:05:05,240 --> 00:05:08,039 Speaker 4: that you know, we were careless right, We made a mistake. 76 00:05:08,520 --> 00:05:13,480 Speaker 4: We apologized our journalism was sloppy here, but we attempted 77 00:05:13,520 --> 00:05:16,320 Speaker 4: to correct that as quickly as possible. And what we 78 00:05:16,360 --> 00:05:18,719 Speaker 4: did didn't rise to the level of reckless disregard to 79 00:05:18,760 --> 00:05:22,120 Speaker 4: the truth. It was merely negligent, and that's not sufficient 80 00:05:22,240 --> 00:05:24,520 Speaker 4: in a libel case. Involving a public figure. 81 00:05:25,000 --> 00:05:28,760 Speaker 2: So did Palin's testimony relate at all to that question 82 00:05:28,920 --> 00:05:30,880 Speaker 2: or was it just about damages? 83 00:05:31,600 --> 00:05:36,560 Speaker 4: So Palin's testimony was about the harm that she alleged 84 00:05:36,600 --> 00:05:40,120 Speaker 4: that she'd suffered. She said things like, you know, it 85 00:05:40,240 --> 00:05:42,560 Speaker 4: kicked the oomph out of you. I guess the language 86 00:05:42,560 --> 00:05:46,520 Speaker 4: she used right to describe how injurious these statements were 87 00:05:46,560 --> 00:05:50,760 Speaker 4: to her sense of self, her emotional states. But interestingly, 88 00:05:50,800 --> 00:05:53,440 Speaker 4: I don't think she was able to demonstrate that she'd 89 00:05:53,520 --> 00:05:57,800 Speaker 4: actually suffered reputational harm. I don't think she lost any 90 00:05:57,960 --> 00:06:02,039 Speaker 4: speaking engagements or book deals or anything tangible as a 91 00:06:02,080 --> 00:06:06,360 Speaker 4: result of this allegation. But yes, her testimony was mainly 92 00:06:06,400 --> 00:06:07,760 Speaker 4: on the harm that she had suffered. 93 00:06:08,040 --> 00:06:10,640 Speaker 2: So what do you think the message is after a 94 00:06:10,720 --> 00:06:14,560 Speaker 2: second jury, basically with the same set of facts, comes 95 00:06:14,560 --> 00:06:17,360 Speaker 2: to the conclusion that The Times didn't defame her. 96 00:06:18,200 --> 00:06:22,200 Speaker 4: Yeah, well, I think the conclusion is that actual malice 97 00:06:22,600 --> 00:06:27,080 Speaker 4: is a very high barred clear and that it does 98 00:06:27,120 --> 00:06:31,000 Speaker 4: a good job of protecting the press in situations where 99 00:06:31,040 --> 00:06:34,920 Speaker 4: there may be an honest mistake, a mistake that a 100 00:06:35,000 --> 00:06:38,800 Speaker 4: responsible news publication goes out of his way to attempt 101 00:06:38,800 --> 00:06:43,640 Speaker 4: to correct. And you know, actual malice says that that's 102 00:06:43,760 --> 00:06:47,440 Speaker 4: not punishable. So now there's the question of whether or 103 00:06:47,560 --> 00:06:51,880 Speaker 4: not Palin will attempt to appeal this, and whether this 104 00:06:52,120 --> 00:06:55,320 Speaker 4: win for The Times will sort of fuel the momentum 105 00:06:55,560 --> 00:06:59,240 Speaker 4: that's out there to get the Supreme Court to reconsider 106 00:06:59,279 --> 00:07:01,960 Speaker 4: the actual malice standard that's kind of lurking in the 107 00:07:01,960 --> 00:07:02,599 Speaker 4: background of this. 108 00:07:03,040 --> 00:07:06,000 Speaker 2: I think Palin's lawyers said that they wanted to use 109 00:07:06,040 --> 00:07:10,600 Speaker 2: this to attack the precedent the landmark New York Times 110 00:07:10,800 --> 00:07:14,559 Speaker 2: the Sullivan case explain how that case has come under 111 00:07:14,680 --> 00:07:15,920 Speaker 2: fire recently. 112 00:07:16,880 --> 00:07:20,840 Speaker 4: So the attack on New York Times versus Sullivan really 113 00:07:20,920 --> 00:07:24,400 Speaker 4: started in earnest I think back in twenty sixteen when 114 00:07:24,440 --> 00:07:28,320 Speaker 4: Trump announced that he wanted to open up libel laws 115 00:07:28,320 --> 00:07:30,880 Speaker 4: to make it easier for him than his allies to 116 00:07:30,920 --> 00:07:33,760 Speaker 4: sue the press for libel, and I think what he 117 00:07:33,960 --> 00:07:38,320 Speaker 4: was referring to was getting the Supreme Court to overworld 118 00:07:38,360 --> 00:07:42,280 Speaker 4: New York Times versus Sullivan. So Ever since then, there 119 00:07:42,280 --> 00:07:46,120 Speaker 4: have been a number of conservative lawyers and activist groups 120 00:07:46,160 --> 00:07:50,880 Speaker 4: and pundits who have been making this case, arguing that 121 00:07:50,960 --> 00:07:56,600 Speaker 4: Sullivan is outdated, that it doesn't protect reputation enough, that 122 00:07:56,840 --> 00:08:01,440 Speaker 4: it protects the lying press, and that it needs to go. 123 00:08:02,360 --> 00:08:07,480 Speaker 4: And these pundits and lawyers have been focusing in particular 124 00:08:07,960 --> 00:08:11,880 Speaker 4: on some cases decided by the Supreme Court after Sullivan 125 00:08:11,920 --> 00:08:15,840 Speaker 4: in nineteen sixty seven, when it extended the Sullivan actual 126 00:08:15,880 --> 00:08:19,480 Speaker 4: malice standard of public figures. The Sullivan dealt only with 127 00:08:19,520 --> 00:08:25,120 Speaker 4: public officials, and so the extension, sometimes called the progeny 128 00:08:25,160 --> 00:08:28,520 Speaker 4: of Sullivan, really create a broad protection for the past 129 00:08:28,640 --> 00:08:31,960 Speaker 4: against libel suits. But that has really been a target 130 00:08:32,400 --> 00:08:35,679 Speaker 4: of these opponents. They want the court to get rid 131 00:08:35,720 --> 00:08:38,800 Speaker 4: of that public figure standard or to limit the definition 132 00:08:38,920 --> 00:08:41,760 Speaker 4: of who is a public figure. And you know, we 133 00:08:41,840 --> 00:08:45,000 Speaker 4: may see that having increasing traction in the coming years. 134 00:08:45,400 --> 00:08:48,679 Speaker 2: You've written a best selling book on the subject, called 135 00:08:48,800 --> 00:08:52,400 Speaker 2: Actual Malice. Do you think that the standard is too 136 00:08:52,559 --> 00:08:53,880 Speaker 2: high or unfair? 137 00:08:54,559 --> 00:08:58,000 Speaker 4: No, I think that the New York Times versus Sullivan's 138 00:08:58,000 --> 00:09:02,760 Speaker 4: standard and the extent the public figures really strikes an 139 00:09:02,760 --> 00:09:07,559 Speaker 4: appropriate balance between the protection of reputation and protections for 140 00:09:07,840 --> 00:09:11,959 Speaker 4: freedom of speech and press. It is possible to recover 141 00:09:12,200 --> 00:09:16,760 Speaker 4: for injury your reputation under our constitutional regime. Right if 142 00:09:16,760 --> 00:09:19,440 Speaker 4: you can show this reckless disregard to the truth, you 143 00:09:19,520 --> 00:09:22,360 Speaker 4: will be able to prevail. So it's not that libel 144 00:09:22,440 --> 00:09:25,640 Speaker 4: law is dead. As some have said, it's just very 145 00:09:25,679 --> 00:09:29,360 Speaker 4: difficult to meet the standard, and that's because we need 146 00:09:29,400 --> 00:09:33,280 Speaker 4: to have a press that is free and robust. The 147 00:09:33,360 --> 00:09:37,280 Speaker 4: Court said in Sullivan, press that can make an honest 148 00:09:37,320 --> 00:09:42,720 Speaker 4: mistake in the course of gathering the news when procedures 149 00:09:42,760 --> 00:09:46,400 Speaker 4: may be time pressured. So I think we have a 150 00:09:46,480 --> 00:09:49,680 Speaker 4: system that's worked very well for the past sixty years, 151 00:09:49,800 --> 00:09:53,400 Speaker 4: that it's really allowed a lot of important journalism to flourish, 152 00:09:53,520 --> 00:09:56,520 Speaker 4: but still allows the same people to recover when they 153 00:09:56,520 --> 00:09:57,439 Speaker 4: can meet that standard. 154 00:09:57,960 --> 00:10:00,440 Speaker 2: I mean, I'm not sure how many people really followed 155 00:10:00,440 --> 00:10:03,360 Speaker 2: this case. It did get a lot of publicity. Do 156 00:10:03,400 --> 00:10:07,000 Speaker 2: you think the loss here encourages the movement to get 157 00:10:07,160 --> 00:10:10,960 Speaker 2: rid of the New York Times v. Sullivan's standard? What's 158 00:10:11,000 --> 00:10:14,000 Speaker 2: the impact of a loss in a case like this. 159 00:10:14,400 --> 00:10:17,439 Speaker 4: Yeah, so I think they could point to this and say, 160 00:10:17,520 --> 00:10:19,839 Speaker 4: you know, there was clearly wrongdoing on the part of 161 00:10:19,880 --> 00:10:24,920 Speaker 4: the Times. The Times admitted its mistake. Nevertheless, under our 162 00:10:25,120 --> 00:10:29,640 Speaker 4: current constitutional regime, the plaintiffs Palin could not recover, and 163 00:10:29,679 --> 00:10:32,360 Speaker 4: they would say that's unfair and that we need to 164 00:10:32,440 --> 00:10:35,319 Speaker 4: kind of lower the bar to make it easier for 165 00:10:35,559 --> 00:10:39,880 Speaker 4: public figures to recover when news media have been careless. 166 00:10:40,160 --> 00:10:43,559 Speaker 4: So I can see this sort of playing into that 167 00:10:43,640 --> 00:10:48,120 Speaker 4: campaign that argues actual malice is just too stringent a standard. 168 00:10:48,160 --> 00:10:51,120 Speaker 4: It doesn't permit people who have been injured to get 169 00:10:51,120 --> 00:10:53,720 Speaker 4: the compensation that they feel they deserve. 170 00:10:54,600 --> 00:10:59,719 Speaker 2: The press has been under attack lately the media, especially 171 00:11:00,160 --> 00:11:03,480 Speaker 2: since Donald Trump has returned to office. Is it a 172 00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:06,840 Speaker 2: surprise in any respect that the jury came back with 173 00:11:06,960 --> 00:11:10,240 Speaker 2: this verdict for The New York Times or is it 174 00:11:10,320 --> 00:11:13,559 Speaker 2: not because we're talking about a jury in Manhattan. 175 00:11:14,040 --> 00:11:17,880 Speaker 4: Yeah, I think it was a little bit of a surprise. 176 00:11:18,360 --> 00:11:22,760 Speaker 4: I mean, again, we have this trial taking place against 177 00:11:22,760 --> 00:11:27,400 Speaker 4: a cultural and political backdrop that has not been very 178 00:11:27,400 --> 00:11:31,480 Speaker 4: favorable to the press. The press is increasingly accused of 179 00:11:31,559 --> 00:11:36,240 Speaker 4: nodding objective trustworthiness is questioned, and so I would not 180 00:11:36,360 --> 00:11:40,959 Speaker 4: have been surprised to have seen a jury go for Palin. 181 00:11:41,679 --> 00:11:45,400 Speaker 4: I think today in libel cases, even when there's weak 182 00:11:45,640 --> 00:11:50,880 Speaker 4: evidence of actual malice, the jury might be motivated to 183 00:11:50,880 --> 00:11:53,400 Speaker 4: be reckless disregard to the truth, just because of this 184 00:11:54,000 --> 00:11:56,040 Speaker 4: distrust of the press that's so pervasive. 185 00:11:56,280 --> 00:11:57,720 Speaker 2: Any final thoughts, I. 186 00:11:57,720 --> 00:12:00,840 Speaker 4: Mean, I think that this could add of the momentum 187 00:12:01,040 --> 00:12:04,800 Speaker 4: to overwhelm near times or sus Sullivan and the progeny cases. 188 00:12:04,840 --> 00:12:07,280 Speaker 4: And so I think those of us who are concerned 189 00:12:07,320 --> 00:12:10,080 Speaker 4: with press freedoms are going to be watching as closely 190 00:12:10,120 --> 00:12:10,800 Speaker 4: to see what happens. 191 00:12:11,200 --> 00:12:13,679 Speaker 2: Thanks so much for joining me on the show. Today's Samantha. 192 00:12:14,120 --> 00:12:17,880 Speaker 2: That's Professor Samantha Barbas of the University of Iowa College 193 00:12:17,920 --> 00:12:23,959 Speaker 2: of Law. President Donald Trump's campaign to pressure elite universities 194 00:12:24,000 --> 00:12:28,320 Speaker 2: into making a wide range of policy changes consistent with 195 00:12:28,400 --> 00:12:33,080 Speaker 2: the administration's agenda met its first major resistance this week, 196 00:12:33,320 --> 00:12:37,160 Speaker 2: when Harvard University sued the government for freezing billions of 197 00:12:37,240 --> 00:12:42,720 Speaker 2: dollars in federal funding. America's oldest and richest university rejected 198 00:12:42,720 --> 00:12:47,960 Speaker 2: the administration's broad demands to overhaul governance, discipline, hiring, and 199 00:12:48,040 --> 00:12:52,960 Speaker 2: admissions policies that are inconsistent with the Trump agenda. The 200 00:12:53,040 --> 00:12:56,600 Speaker 2: administration has framed its efforts as an initiative to fight 201 00:12:56,679 --> 00:13:02,480 Speaker 2: campus anti semitism. Harvard's president Alan Garber said no government, 202 00:13:02,760 --> 00:13:06,600 Speaker 2: regardless of which parties in power, should dictate what private 203 00:13:06,720 --> 00:13:10,720 Speaker 2: universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and 204 00:13:10,800 --> 00:13:15,080 Speaker 2: which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue. Joining 205 00:13:15,120 --> 00:13:19,400 Speaker 2: me is Bloomberg Legal reporter David Voriakis tell us about 206 00:13:19,600 --> 00:13:24,760 Speaker 2: the demands that the Trump administration made on Harvard. In 207 00:13:24,800 --> 00:13:27,239 Speaker 2: that I think five page letter. 208 00:13:27,600 --> 00:13:33,599 Speaker 5: The Trump administration wanted Harvard to overhaul its governance, discipline, 209 00:13:34,040 --> 00:13:38,319 Speaker 5: and hiring policies, as well as in its diversity, equity 210 00:13:38,360 --> 00:13:42,920 Speaker 5: and inclusion programs, and Harvard rejected that. 211 00:13:43,400 --> 00:13:46,240 Speaker 2: I mean, some of the demands were like auditing professors 212 00:13:46,280 --> 00:13:51,319 Speaker 2: for plagiarism, appointing an outside overseer to make sure that 213 00:13:51,440 --> 00:13:57,080 Speaker 2: academic departments were viewpoint diverse, federal government oversight of things 214 00:13:57,200 --> 00:14:02,520 Speaker 2: like admissions. I mean, they were very extensive demands on 215 00:14:02,640 --> 00:14:05,880 Speaker 2: Harvard that really would intrude on the way it runs 216 00:14:05,880 --> 00:14:09,920 Speaker 2: its university, and many had nothing to do with anti semitism. 217 00:14:11,120 --> 00:14:13,679 Speaker 5: Well, Harvard says that it would intrude on the way 218 00:14:13,679 --> 00:14:17,640 Speaker 5: it runs its university, and there were demands that had 219 00:14:17,640 --> 00:14:21,120 Speaker 5: to do with anti semitism. But this moment is one 220 00:14:21,160 --> 00:14:25,760 Speaker 5: in which the Trump administration is pushing for a number 221 00:14:25,800 --> 00:14:33,000 Speaker 5: of other changes at the university relating to hiring, discipline, governance, 222 00:14:33,560 --> 00:14:38,120 Speaker 5: and so they're taking the controversy over anti semitism and 223 00:14:38,160 --> 00:14:42,640 Speaker 5: trying to push Harvard and other universities to make much 224 00:14:42,680 --> 00:14:47,000 Speaker 5: more sweeping changes than merely beefing up its efforts to 225 00:14:47,080 --> 00:14:49,560 Speaker 5: protect Jewish students against anti semitism. 226 00:14:50,120 --> 00:14:54,000 Speaker 2: The funding cuts go basically to medical research. It's not 227 00:14:54,120 --> 00:14:57,920 Speaker 2: about what's happening at the university itself. It's about funding 228 00:14:58,280 --> 00:15:03,080 Speaker 2: cuts to things like research on childhood cancer, multiple scroses, 229 00:15:03,200 --> 00:15:05,360 Speaker 2: Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's. 230 00:15:05,960 --> 00:15:09,760 Speaker 5: At the moment, they're funding freezes, and the freeze would 231 00:15:09,880 --> 00:15:14,240 Speaker 5: also impact the education of thousands of graduate students and 232 00:15:14,320 --> 00:15:20,160 Speaker 5: postdoctorate fellows in science, technology, medicine, and public health. According 233 00:15:20,200 --> 00:15:24,000 Speaker 5: to the Harvard lawsuit that's in federal court in Boston. 234 00:15:24,800 --> 00:15:29,160 Speaker 2: In the lawsuit says that the government can't identify any 235 00:15:29,280 --> 00:15:35,160 Speaker 2: rational connection between anti semitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, 236 00:15:35,240 --> 00:15:39,560 Speaker 2: and other research it has frozen. What's the administration's response 237 00:15:39,640 --> 00:15:39,960 Speaker 2: to that? 238 00:15:40,760 --> 00:15:46,720 Speaker 5: The Trump administration would essentially say that, I guess the 239 00:15:46,880 --> 00:15:52,200 Speaker 5: entire university and its hospitals and research divisions are infected 240 00:15:52,760 --> 00:15:57,800 Speaker 5: by this anti semitism and DEI push at the university. 241 00:15:58,360 --> 00:16:01,920 Speaker 5: Under the law, the the Civil Rights Act of nineteen 242 00:16:02,040 --> 00:16:09,040 Speaker 5: sixty four, Title six says that an institution cannot discriminate 243 00:16:09,120 --> 00:16:16,160 Speaker 5: based on race, color, or national origin. And Harvard says 244 00:16:16,240 --> 00:16:20,360 Speaker 5: that the only way the government can punish a university 245 00:16:20,480 --> 00:16:25,240 Speaker 5: under that law is to withhold funds in the specific 246 00:16:25,400 --> 00:16:30,000 Speaker 5: program or area of the school that's affected by whatever 247 00:16:30,040 --> 00:16:34,440 Speaker 5: the discrimination is, so that if there's say a department 248 00:16:35,440 --> 00:16:39,960 Speaker 5: where there is anti semitism, it would be funding for 249 00:16:40,080 --> 00:16:44,320 Speaker 5: that department or some area of research, say that's affected 250 00:16:44,600 --> 00:16:47,720 Speaker 5: by anti semitism. That should be the area that should 251 00:16:47,760 --> 00:16:50,360 Speaker 5: be punished, not the entire university. 252 00:16:50,920 --> 00:16:54,640 Speaker 2: And Harvard is also claiming that the funding can be 253 00:16:54,720 --> 00:17:00,120 Speaker 2: withheld only after there's proper procedure. The administration has to 254 00:17:00,160 --> 00:17:04,440 Speaker 2: tell the school exactly what it's doing that violates the 255 00:17:04,480 --> 00:17:07,320 Speaker 2: Civil Rights Act, and there has to be an opportunity 256 00:17:07,359 --> 00:17:10,600 Speaker 2: for the school to respond, and there's been none of 257 00:17:10,640 --> 00:17:11,200 Speaker 2: that here. 258 00:17:12,000 --> 00:17:14,280 Speaker 5: Right. Harvard says that they have to have a chance 259 00:17:14,359 --> 00:17:17,720 Speaker 5: to correct whatever their failures are, and they did not 260 00:17:17,880 --> 00:17:22,560 Speaker 5: get that chance. I would say that the administration has 261 00:17:22,680 --> 00:17:28,560 Speaker 5: said that its demands were part of a negotiation process, 262 00:17:29,760 --> 00:17:32,720 Speaker 5: but Harvard didn't see it that way. They saw it 263 00:17:32,760 --> 00:17:38,119 Speaker 5: as a much more extreme measure. And so now that 264 00:17:38,200 --> 00:17:42,600 Speaker 5: they've filed a lawsuit in federal court, it doesn't necessarily 265 00:17:42,640 --> 00:17:47,200 Speaker 5: mean that any negotiations will stop. Civil lawsuits often end 266 00:17:47,320 --> 00:17:48,919 Speaker 5: through negotiated settlements. 267 00:17:49,280 --> 00:17:52,159 Speaker 2: There's also a First Amendment claim in the lawsuit tell 268 00:17:52,240 --> 00:17:52,880 Speaker 2: us about that. 269 00:17:53,440 --> 00:17:59,040 Speaker 5: Well, Harvard is a private institution, and it is arguing 270 00:17:59,640 --> 00:18:06,040 Speaker 5: that the government cannot dictate what the mix of speech 271 00:18:06,240 --> 00:18:11,280 Speaker 5: and ideology is at the university, That as a university, 272 00:18:11,720 --> 00:18:16,720 Speaker 5: it tries to promote a diverse array of viewpoints and 273 00:18:16,800 --> 00:18:25,040 Speaker 5: ideology among its faculty and students and programs, and that 274 00:18:25,040 --> 00:18:28,640 Speaker 5: that right to do so is protected by the First 275 00:18:28,680 --> 00:18:33,360 Speaker 5: Amendment on free speech grounds, and that the government cannot 276 00:18:33,400 --> 00:18:37,159 Speaker 5: dictate to a private university what the proper mix of 277 00:18:37,240 --> 00:18:39,120 Speaker 5: speech and ideology must be. 278 00:18:39,880 --> 00:18:44,159 Speaker 2: The administration is reportedly planning to freeze another one billion 279 00:18:44,240 --> 00:18:49,680 Speaker 2: dollars in research funding, and it's weighing revoking Harvard's tax 280 00:18:49,680 --> 00:18:51,600 Speaker 2: exem status right. 281 00:18:51,680 --> 00:18:55,800 Speaker 5: These are all threats that have been published or floated, 282 00:18:56,680 --> 00:19:00,520 Speaker 5: and they have not happened yet. But these are concerns 283 00:19:00,640 --> 00:19:06,000 Speaker 5: that Harvard has raised in its lawsuit, and presumably by 284 00:19:06,040 --> 00:19:11,359 Speaker 5: taking it into court, it can block future actions in 285 00:19:11,400 --> 00:19:14,480 Speaker 5: the near term, at least by the administration until the 286 00:19:14,560 --> 00:19:15,639 Speaker 5: case is resolved. 287 00:19:15,920 --> 00:19:19,639 Speaker 2: Has Harvard taken steps to address anti Semitism on campus. 288 00:19:19,920 --> 00:19:24,760 Speaker 5: Harvard has taken a number of steps its disciplined faculty 289 00:19:24,960 --> 00:19:29,920 Speaker 5: and students. It has a task force on anti Semitism 290 00:19:30,000 --> 00:19:33,040 Speaker 5: that's done work and is about to produce a report, 291 00:19:33,760 --> 00:19:38,920 Speaker 5: and it has tried to change the tone on campus 292 00:19:38,960 --> 00:19:43,639 Speaker 5: from the initial days and weeks after the October twenty 293 00:19:43,720 --> 00:19:50,080 Speaker 5: twenty three attacked by Hamas on Israel and the protests 294 00:19:50,560 --> 00:19:56,080 Speaker 5: on campus and nationwide over Israel's response in Gaza is 295 00:19:56,160 --> 00:20:01,520 Speaker 5: what led to many Jewish students saying that they were 296 00:20:02,000 --> 00:20:05,000 Speaker 5: targeted by antisemitic behavior. 297 00:20:05,760 --> 00:20:08,719 Speaker 2: So now let's talk about the legal team that Harvard 298 00:20:08,760 --> 00:20:13,000 Speaker 2: has hired. Two conservative lawyers with connections to the Trump administration. 299 00:20:13,240 --> 00:20:16,440 Speaker 5: One of them is Bill Burke of Quinn Emmanuel, and 300 00:20:16,720 --> 00:20:22,399 Speaker 5: he is a conservative lawyer who actually works as the 301 00:20:22,480 --> 00:20:27,400 Speaker 5: outside ethics advisor for the Trump Organization for the president's 302 00:20:27,560 --> 00:20:32,560 Speaker 5: private business, and he's also represented a number of billionaires 303 00:20:32,720 --> 00:20:37,840 Speaker 5: and conservative causes in his career. He is said to 304 00:20:37,880 --> 00:20:42,480 Speaker 5: have a very engaging manner and formidable courtroom skills, and 305 00:20:42,960 --> 00:20:47,800 Speaker 5: is in some ways ideologically aligned with Trump. He's represented, 306 00:20:47,800 --> 00:20:51,560 Speaker 5: for instance, Ken Griffin in his lawsuit against the Irs. 307 00:20:52,160 --> 00:20:57,040 Speaker 5: Griffin's tax returns were stolen by an IRS contractor and 308 00:20:57,280 --> 00:21:00,760 Speaker 5: leaked to the media. He helped to extract an apology 309 00:21:00,800 --> 00:21:04,960 Speaker 5: from the IRS, and he represented a number of Trump 310 00:21:05,080 --> 00:21:09,399 Speaker 5: insiders in the Mueller investigation in the first term. His 311 00:21:09,720 --> 00:21:15,080 Speaker 5: co counsel in this case is Robert Herr, who is 312 00:21:15,240 --> 00:21:19,480 Speaker 5: also a conservative lawyer of King and Spalding, and he 313 00:21:19,600 --> 00:21:25,800 Speaker 5: investigated Joe Biden's handling of classified documents. His report was 314 00:21:25,920 --> 00:21:30,200 Speaker 5: notable because he described Biden as a well meaning elderly 315 00:21:30,280 --> 00:21:31,520 Speaker 5: man with a poor memory. 316 00:21:32,320 --> 00:21:36,880 Speaker 2: During the congressional testimony of her Burke represented her. So, 317 00:21:36,960 --> 00:21:40,480 Speaker 2: I think that's interesting. But just today President Trump on 318 00:21:40,600 --> 00:21:44,240 Speaker 2: truth Social said Harvard is a threat to democracy with 319 00:21:44,280 --> 00:21:47,000 Speaker 2: a lawyer who represents me and who should therefore be 320 00:21:47,080 --> 00:21:50,600 Speaker 2: forced to resign immediately or be fired. He's not that 321 00:21:50,720 --> 00:21:53,639 Speaker 2: good anyway, and I hope that my very big and 322 00:21:53,680 --> 00:21:56,840 Speaker 2: beautiful company now run by my sons gets rid of 323 00:21:56,880 --> 00:22:02,880 Speaker 2: him asap. And just like that, asap, the Trump organization 324 00:22:03,480 --> 00:22:07,240 Speaker 2: fired Burke. Eric Trump said in an email's statement to 325 00:22:07,240 --> 00:22:10,800 Speaker 2: Bloomberg News, I view it as conflict and I will 326 00:22:10,840 --> 00:22:14,720 Speaker 2: be moving in a different direction. Burke declined to comment. 327 00:22:15,640 --> 00:22:19,800 Speaker 2: Let's turn now to someone Trump can't fire. The judge 328 00:22:19,800 --> 00:22:23,679 Speaker 2: in the case. Federal judge Allison Burrows, who was a 329 00:22:23,720 --> 00:22:28,159 Speaker 2: prosecutor and a private lawyer before becoming a judge, and 330 00:22:28,200 --> 00:22:31,080 Speaker 2: who has been involved in a lot of high profile cases, 331 00:22:31,119 --> 00:22:34,720 Speaker 2: including some that involve Harvard right. 332 00:22:35,000 --> 00:22:39,800 Speaker 5: She handled the affirmative Action case a few years ago, 333 00:22:40,720 --> 00:22:46,600 Speaker 5: in which she upheld Harvard's position, but was later overturned 334 00:22:46,720 --> 00:22:50,960 Speaker 5: by the Supreme Court, which ruled that race could not 335 00:22:51,080 --> 00:22:56,680 Speaker 5: be a factor in admissions. She also recently blocked the 336 00:22:56,720 --> 00:23:01,480 Speaker 5: Trump administration from capping overhead and an administrative costs for 337 00:23:02,119 --> 00:23:07,560 Speaker 5: government funded research at nine universities, including Princeton and MIT. 338 00:23:08,800 --> 00:23:11,840 Speaker 2: This attack on Harvard is part of the Trump administration's 339 00:23:11,880 --> 00:23:16,959 Speaker 2: attack on elite universities. Why an attack on elite universities? 340 00:23:17,119 --> 00:23:19,800 Speaker 2: What does Trump have against them? He went to the 341 00:23:19,920 --> 00:23:21,160 Speaker 2: University of Pennsylvania. 342 00:23:21,760 --> 00:23:24,399 Speaker 5: I can't get into the mind of the president. I 343 00:23:24,480 --> 00:23:30,080 Speaker 5: know that he believes that there's group think at these universities, 344 00:23:30,160 --> 00:23:35,320 Speaker 5: that they have a liberal bias that is unfair to 345 00:23:35,520 --> 00:23:39,679 Speaker 5: him and his supporters and the worldview that he espouses. 346 00:23:40,359 --> 00:23:44,440 Speaker 5: And I believe that he thinks they've placed too much 347 00:23:44,720 --> 00:23:50,800 Speaker 5: emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion programs and that has 348 00:23:51,400 --> 00:23:57,160 Speaker 5: made them weaker as institutions. He also is very strongly 349 00:23:57,200 --> 00:24:02,040 Speaker 5: supportive of Israel and believes that they're been far too 350 00:24:02,119 --> 00:24:07,760 Speaker 5: many anti Semitic attacks and protests on campuses. Since October 351 00:24:07,840 --> 00:24:08,800 Speaker 5: twenty twenty. 352 00:24:08,480 --> 00:24:12,320 Speaker 2: Three, Trump has already canceled four hundred million dollars in 353 00:24:12,359 --> 00:24:18,360 Speaker 2: federal money to Columbia and issued freezes on funding at Columbia, Cornell, 354 00:24:18,440 --> 00:24:22,359 Speaker 2: Northwestern Princeton, and the University of Pennsylvania. But Harvard is 355 00:24:22,400 --> 00:24:25,359 Speaker 2: the only one that has fought back and file suit. 356 00:24:25,800 --> 00:24:27,520 Speaker 2: Columbia caved. 357 00:24:27,880 --> 00:24:31,280 Speaker 5: That makes the Harvard lawsuit a significant milestone in this 358 00:24:31,640 --> 00:24:36,560 Speaker 5: attack on higher education. Until this moment, when Harvard sued, 359 00:24:37,119 --> 00:24:40,720 Speaker 5: universities were trying to essentially cut deals on their own, 360 00:24:40,760 --> 00:24:42,960 Speaker 5: which is what many of the biggest law firms did 361 00:24:43,000 --> 00:24:46,280 Speaker 5: as well. There have been several law firms that have sued, 362 00:24:46,720 --> 00:24:50,040 Speaker 5: and the common thread is that they believe they have 363 00:24:50,119 --> 00:24:54,240 Speaker 5: free speech rights that they're defending and it allows them 364 00:24:54,280 --> 00:24:59,560 Speaker 5: to express themselves through their business activities or their educational 365 00:24:59,600 --> 00:25:02,800 Speaker 5: activity as they see fit, and that the government cannot 366 00:25:02,800 --> 00:25:06,879 Speaker 5: intrude on that. Against that, Trump is threatening the loss 367 00:25:06,880 --> 00:25:11,800 Speaker 5: of federal business or contracts or funding, and he brings 368 00:25:11,840 --> 00:25:16,840 Speaker 5: a great deal of political firepower to this fight that 369 00:25:17,160 --> 00:25:21,240 Speaker 5: these institutions, the universities, and the law firms are acutely 370 00:25:21,280 --> 00:25:23,840 Speaker 5: aware of and have to navigate at this moment. 371 00:25:24,119 --> 00:25:28,080 Speaker 2: And Harvard is asking the judge to expedite its lawsuit 372 00:25:28,160 --> 00:25:31,000 Speaker 2: through some rey judgment. So we'll see where that goes. 373 00:25:31,119 --> 00:25:36,280 Speaker 2: Thanks David. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter David Voriakis. This is Bloomberg. 374 00:25:37,680 --> 00:25:41,160 Speaker 2: President Trump has been turning to the Supreme Court over 375 00:25:41,200 --> 00:25:44,560 Speaker 2: and over again as lower court judges reign in his 376 00:25:44,720 --> 00:25:48,800 Speaker 2: efforts to push the limits of executive power, asking the 377 00:25:48,840 --> 00:25:53,800 Speaker 2: Court to intervene immediately on an emergency basis to overrule 378 00:25:53,880 --> 00:25:57,880 Speaker 2: lower court judges. And again today, for the tenth time 379 00:25:58,000 --> 00:26:00,840 Speaker 2: in the three months since he took office, the Trump 380 00:26:00,920 --> 00:26:04,680 Speaker 2: administration is asking the Supreme Court to block a federal 381 00:26:04,760 --> 00:26:08,880 Speaker 2: judges ruling that put the new ban on transgender service 382 00:26:08,960 --> 00:26:12,560 Speaker 2: members on hold while the legal challenge by a group 383 00:26:12,600 --> 00:26:17,200 Speaker 2: of service members proceeds. Ten times so far, that's more 384 00:26:17,240 --> 00:26:20,919 Speaker 2: than the total number of such emergency request during the 385 00:26:20,960 --> 00:26:26,000 Speaker 2: sixteen years of the presidencies of Barack Obama and George W. Bush. 386 00:26:26,200 --> 00:26:29,840 Speaker 2: And it puts a new test of LGBTQ rights and 387 00:26:30,000 --> 00:26:34,760 Speaker 2: presidential power before the justices. The Supreme Court allowed Trump's 388 00:26:34,760 --> 00:26:38,720 Speaker 2: transgender military ban during his first term in office, but 389 00:26:38,840 --> 00:26:42,399 Speaker 2: the new policy goes further. It would mean the expulsion 390 00:26:42,440 --> 00:26:46,520 Speaker 2: of potentially thousands of members of the armed forces, including 391 00:26:46,560 --> 00:26:50,600 Speaker 2: people who have served openly for years. Joining me is Bloomberg. 392 00:26:50,680 --> 00:26:53,840 Speaker 2: Supreme Court reporter Greg Store Greg tell us about the 393 00:26:53,920 --> 00:26:56,880 Speaker 2: latest emergency request by the Trump administration. 394 00:26:57,280 --> 00:26:59,520 Speaker 1: The administration is asking the Supreme Court to let it 395 00:26:59,560 --> 00:27:04,560 Speaker 1: ban transgender service members. The President issued the executive order 396 00:27:04,640 --> 00:27:09,639 Speaker 1: on January twenty seventh, thing all transgender service members, with 397 00:27:10,119 --> 00:27:12,840 Speaker 1: very few exceptions, has to leave the military, and we're 398 00:27:12,880 --> 00:27:16,879 Speaker 1: not going to allow other people to enlist. A lower 399 00:27:16,880 --> 00:27:21,040 Speaker 1: court block that, and the administration is asking the Supreme 400 00:27:21,040 --> 00:27:22,240 Speaker 1: Court to lift that hold. 401 00:27:22,520 --> 00:27:26,320 Speaker 2: Yeah, So the lower court judge said that the government's 402 00:27:26,440 --> 00:27:31,000 Speaker 2: arguments are not persuasive and it's not an especially close question. 403 00:27:32,200 --> 00:27:36,520 Speaker 2: And there are two cases involving the transgender military ban 404 00:27:36,720 --> 00:27:41,879 Speaker 2: making their way through the system, one where the Ninth 405 00:27:41,920 --> 00:27:45,880 Speaker 2: Circuit refused to hear the appeal and another one where 406 00:27:45,880 --> 00:27:48,080 Speaker 2: the DC's Circuit heard arguments. 407 00:27:48,560 --> 00:27:51,439 Speaker 1: So what's that the Supreme Court right now is just 408 00:27:51,600 --> 00:27:54,440 Speaker 1: one case out of the federal judge and to come 409 00:27:54,480 --> 00:27:58,960 Speaker 1: in Washington, where the judge blocked the policy nationwide. The 410 00:27:59,040 --> 00:28:02,640 Speaker 1: Ninth Circuit refused to intervene there. There's also a second 411 00:28:02,640 --> 00:28:05,360 Speaker 1: case that is currently at the Federal Appeals Court here 412 00:28:05,400 --> 00:28:08,600 Speaker 1: in Washington, similar issues, but at the moment there's not 413 00:28:08,680 --> 00:28:10,159 Speaker 1: a nationwide injunction there. 414 00:28:10,400 --> 00:28:12,639 Speaker 2: I mean, usually the Supreme Court, you know, like the 415 00:28:12,680 --> 00:28:15,760 Speaker 2: lower courts to look at things before they take it. 416 00:28:16,040 --> 00:28:18,680 Speaker 1: Yeah, and we'll see that the Supreme Court could well 417 00:28:18,720 --> 00:28:21,800 Speaker 1: wait for the DC Circuit Fiederal Appeals Court here in 418 00:28:21,920 --> 00:28:26,200 Speaker 1: Washington to act before doing anything. On the other hand, 419 00:28:26,240 --> 00:28:28,880 Speaker 1: this is a topic that the Court is familiar with, 420 00:28:29,280 --> 00:28:32,760 Speaker 1: at least most of the numbers, because the Trump administration 421 00:28:33,200 --> 00:28:36,280 Speaker 1: the first time around had a policy that didn't go 422 00:28:36,359 --> 00:28:39,040 Speaker 1: quite as far. But the Supreme Court let the Trump 423 00:28:39,080 --> 00:28:44,560 Speaker 1: administration ban transgender people from serving back the first time around. 424 00:28:44,760 --> 00:28:48,320 Speaker 1: The difference is whether a couple differences. One, this would 425 00:28:48,360 --> 00:28:53,440 Speaker 1: actually force people who are openly transgender to leave the military. 426 00:28:54,240 --> 00:28:56,920 Speaker 1: And secondly, there's been an awful lot of experience with 427 00:28:57,000 --> 00:29:00,440 Speaker 1: transgender people in the military, and one of the arguments 428 00:29:00,440 --> 00:29:03,120 Speaker 1: in this case is that the administration didn't even look 429 00:29:03,160 --> 00:29:06,400 Speaker 1: at what the experience was and whether or not those 430 00:29:06,400 --> 00:29:08,480 Speaker 1: folks were serving successfully. 431 00:29:08,280 --> 00:29:11,160 Speaker 2: During the first administration when it allowed the band to 432 00:29:11,200 --> 00:29:13,840 Speaker 2: go forward, Was that just on a temporary basis as 433 00:29:13,880 --> 00:29:16,200 Speaker 2: the cases made their way through the courts. 434 00:29:16,800 --> 00:29:20,760 Speaker 1: It was, but that ultimately ended up going into effect 435 00:29:21,000 --> 00:29:24,720 Speaker 1: more permanently, or at least throughout the rest of that 436 00:29:25,200 --> 00:29:29,760 Speaker 1: first Trump administration before President Joe Biden came into office 437 00:29:29,760 --> 00:29:30,440 Speaker 1: and reversed it. 438 00:29:30,880 --> 00:29:35,280 Speaker 2: The Supreme Court asked the challengers to file a response 439 00:29:35,320 --> 00:29:37,880 Speaker 2: by May first. What does that mean? Does that mean 440 00:29:37,920 --> 00:29:40,640 Speaker 2: the Court's going to consider it, is going to take it, 441 00:29:40,760 --> 00:29:41,600 Speaker 2: or nothing at all? 442 00:29:41,840 --> 00:29:44,080 Speaker 1: Nothing at all. That's a pretty standard step. And it 443 00:29:44,120 --> 00:29:47,520 Speaker 1: was actually Justice Alaina Kagan, who's the justices assigned to 444 00:29:47,560 --> 00:29:50,680 Speaker 1: handle matters out of the Ninth Circuit. That was her 445 00:29:50,720 --> 00:29:53,320 Speaker 1: asking for it. And that's a pretty standard step whenever 446 00:29:53,360 --> 00:29:56,720 Speaker 1: you get an emergency application like this, and a week 447 00:29:56,800 --> 00:29:59,560 Speaker 1: is kind of a standard period of time. If there's 448 00:29:59,600 --> 00:30:03,080 Speaker 1: no impelling reasons that do it more quickly than that 449 00:30:03,240 --> 00:30:04,600 Speaker 1: doesn't mean they're going to take it. In fact, the 450 00:30:04,640 --> 00:30:07,680 Speaker 1: Trump administration hasn't asked them to take the case, hasn't 451 00:30:07,720 --> 00:30:12,040 Speaker 1: asked them to grant sert to use legalise there. The 452 00:30:12,080 --> 00:30:14,960 Speaker 1: only thing the administration is asking for is let us 453 00:30:14,960 --> 00:30:18,360 Speaker 1: go ahead and start implementing this ban while the litigation 454 00:30:18,520 --> 00:30:21,080 Speaker 1: goes forward. Now, I say, just that could mean that 455 00:30:21,120 --> 00:30:24,400 Speaker 1: people are actually expelled from the military during the course 456 00:30:24,400 --> 00:30:25,120 Speaker 1: of the litigation. 457 00:30:25,800 --> 00:30:29,680 Speaker 2: So this is the tenth time the Trump administration has 458 00:30:29,760 --> 00:30:34,400 Speaker 2: filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court. I'm sure 459 00:30:34,440 --> 00:30:39,720 Speaker 2: no other administration has filed so many emergency applications at 460 00:30:39,720 --> 00:30:43,960 Speaker 2: the beginning of an administration. I mean under President Biden, 461 00:30:44,160 --> 00:30:49,320 Speaker 2: the government sought emergency relief nineteen times in four years. 462 00:30:50,160 --> 00:30:52,239 Speaker 2: So Greg and how many of these cases has the 463 00:30:52,240 --> 00:30:55,040 Speaker 2: Supreme Court granted the Trump application? 464 00:30:55,640 --> 00:30:59,880 Speaker 1: In roughly half. But in some cases the Court has 465 00:31:00,040 --> 00:31:02,920 Speaker 1: has sort of split the difference or given a little 466 00:31:02,960 --> 00:31:05,840 Speaker 1: bit to each side. So for example, there was the 467 00:31:05,920 --> 00:31:11,240 Speaker 1: case where they lifted the nationwide order that had blocked 468 00:31:11,240 --> 00:31:15,960 Speaker 1: deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. But in that same decision, 469 00:31:16,000 --> 00:31:19,320 Speaker 1: the court also said, but hey, people are entitled to 470 00:31:19,440 --> 00:31:22,920 Speaker 1: an opportunity to appear before and judge before they are 471 00:31:23,160 --> 00:31:26,640 Speaker 1: deported under the Alien Enemies Act. There's another one where 472 00:31:26,640 --> 00:31:29,440 Speaker 1: they're going to hear arguments. It's still at the emergency stage. 473 00:31:29,440 --> 00:31:33,080 Speaker 1: But the birthright citizenship case. They're going to hear arguments there, 474 00:31:33,360 --> 00:31:36,720 Speaker 1: and then there's still another one that is, as we speak, 475 00:31:36,880 --> 00:31:40,920 Speaker 1: pending involving whether the president can fire the heads of 476 00:31:41,360 --> 00:31:43,120 Speaker 1: independent federal agencies. 477 00:31:43,800 --> 00:31:47,320 Speaker 2: So, speaking of the birthright citizenship where they set a 478 00:31:47,400 --> 00:31:51,840 Speaker 2: special argument session in May, why do you think they 479 00:31:51,880 --> 00:31:55,800 Speaker 2: did that. I think it's narrowed to nationwide injunctions. I mean, 480 00:31:55,840 --> 00:31:57,160 Speaker 2: what's the emergency there. 481 00:31:57,680 --> 00:32:00,360 Speaker 1: I'm going to be speculating here because we don't know sure. 482 00:32:00,360 --> 00:32:02,400 Speaker 1: All we know is that they agreed to hear arguments 483 00:32:02,560 --> 00:32:06,520 Speaker 1: that said, this issue that you alluded to, involving nationwide 484 00:32:06,520 --> 00:32:10,440 Speaker 1: injunctions is something that the justices have been clear they're 485 00:32:10,480 --> 00:32:13,640 Speaker 1: really interested in. Members of both parties have complained about 486 00:32:13,720 --> 00:32:17,640 Speaker 1: nationwide injunctions, mostly at least certainly these days Republicans, And 487 00:32:17,680 --> 00:32:20,840 Speaker 1: the idea is, the argument is that a single judge 488 00:32:20,840 --> 00:32:24,560 Speaker 1: shouldn't have the authority to block a policy nationwide, and 489 00:32:24,600 --> 00:32:27,320 Speaker 1: that judge should limit whatever he or she does to 490 00:32:27,360 --> 00:32:31,560 Speaker 1: the parties before them in that case. And it's an 491 00:32:31,680 --> 00:32:35,320 Speaker 1: issue that the Court, at least on the face of it, 492 00:32:35,440 --> 00:32:38,280 Speaker 1: just wanted to think about a little bit more. Now 493 00:32:38,640 --> 00:32:42,000 Speaker 1: in the context of birthright citizenship, This is a case 494 00:32:42,040 --> 00:32:47,160 Speaker 1: where the President has announced a policy to limit birthright 495 00:32:47,240 --> 00:32:51,080 Speaker 1: citizenship to the people who are born of either a 496 00:32:51,120 --> 00:32:54,920 Speaker 1: citizen or somebody who has a green card, and that 497 00:32:55,040 --> 00:32:59,280 Speaker 1: would be a massive change in the way the Constitution's 498 00:32:59,280 --> 00:33:02,440 Speaker 1: fourteenth Amendment has been understood for the last one hundred 499 00:33:02,440 --> 00:33:06,200 Speaker 1: plus years. And if the Court were to use this 500 00:33:06,320 --> 00:33:10,200 Speaker 1: issue of nationwide injunctions to say, oh, the judges who 501 00:33:10,280 --> 00:33:13,800 Speaker 1: blocked that new Trump policy can only do so for 502 00:33:13,880 --> 00:33:16,200 Speaker 1: the people in front of them, that would have a 503 00:33:16,240 --> 00:33:19,640 Speaker 1: tremendous practical effect because it would mean that the President 504 00:33:19,720 --> 00:33:26,000 Speaker 1: could implement that policy restricting birthright citizenship in most or 505 00:33:26,040 --> 00:33:28,720 Speaker 1: depending on how exactly the Court does it, maybe maybe 506 00:33:28,760 --> 00:33:30,720 Speaker 1: just half, but a big part of the country. And 507 00:33:30,760 --> 00:33:34,600 Speaker 1: that would obviously be a very huge decision from a 508 00:33:34,600 --> 00:33:39,000 Speaker 1: practical standpoint, Even if technically it's only about that issue 509 00:33:39,000 --> 00:33:40,480 Speaker 1: of nationwide injunctions. 510 00:33:40,560 --> 00:33:45,320 Speaker 2: There should be interesting arguments in mid May. Thanks so much, Greg. 511 00:33:45,840 --> 00:33:49,880 Speaker 2: That's Bloomberg Supreme Court reporter Greg store. In other legal 512 00:33:49,920 --> 00:33:54,600 Speaker 2: news today, grieving relatives and survivors of a mass shooting 513 00:33:54,880 --> 00:33:58,320 Speaker 2: at a July fourth parade in twenty twenty two in 514 00:33:58,400 --> 00:34:02,840 Speaker 2: Highland Park, Illinois, recounted howering details for hours in a 515 00:34:02,880 --> 00:34:06,280 Speaker 2: pack courtroom this week, telling a judge that the attack 516 00:34:06,360 --> 00:34:10,360 Speaker 2: has done long lasting damage, while the man who admitted 517 00:34:10,400 --> 00:34:14,080 Speaker 2: to carefully planning the shooting remained out of sight in 518 00:34:14,120 --> 00:34:18,480 Speaker 2: his jail cell. The long awaited sentencing hearing for Robert 519 00:34:18,600 --> 00:34:22,240 Speaker 2: Crimo the third brought together dozens of people whose lives 520 00:34:22,239 --> 00:34:25,480 Speaker 2: were torn apart by the shooting in the Lake Michigan 521 00:34:25,560 --> 00:34:29,319 Speaker 2: suburb north of Chicago. Even as they were accustomed to 522 00:34:29,440 --> 00:34:33,959 Speaker 2: Grimau's erratic behavior, skipping hearings, backing out of a deal 523 00:34:34,000 --> 00:34:39,239 Speaker 2: with prosecutors, changing his flea, and firing attorneys, survivors said 524 00:34:39,280 --> 00:34:43,800 Speaker 2: his absence set off a range of emotions, including relief, anger, 525 00:34:43,960 --> 00:34:48,280 Speaker 2: and closure. Here's Liz Turnip Speed, who was seriously injured 526 00:34:48,280 --> 00:34:52,000 Speaker 2: in the shooting and now has to rely on a cane. 527 00:34:52,200 --> 00:34:54,439 Speaker 3: I don't have to think about him anymore. I don't 528 00:34:54,480 --> 00:34:59,640 Speaker 3: have to worry about him anymore, and me and my 529 00:34:59,719 --> 00:35:05,520 Speaker 3: husband and my daughter can continue to move forward and 530 00:35:05,560 --> 00:35:06,719 Speaker 3: I can continue to heal. 531 00:35:07,480 --> 00:35:13,040 Speaker 2: Judge Victoria Rosetti gave Cremo seven sentences of life in prison, 532 00:35:13,800 --> 00:35:17,080 Speaker 2: one for each of the people he killed, and fifty 533 00:35:17,200 --> 00:35:20,200 Speaker 2: years in prison for each of the people he injured. 534 00:35:20,640 --> 00:35:22,760 Speaker 2: There's no possibility of parole. 535 00:35:23,960 --> 00:35:29,799 Speaker 3: I was able to hear Judge Zetti sentence him. I'm 536 00:35:29,800 --> 00:35:33,120 Speaker 3: not going to use his name to fifty years for 537 00:35:33,200 --> 00:35:40,799 Speaker 3: my attempted murder. And while I don't have closure, it's 538 00:35:40,880 --> 00:35:46,160 Speaker 3: closing a chapter on this part of our lives. 539 00:35:46,760 --> 00:35:49,239 Speaker 2: The judge said that there were no words that could 540 00:35:49,320 --> 00:35:53,200 Speaker 2: adequately describe and capture the horror and pain that was 541 00:35:53,239 --> 00:35:58,080 Speaker 2: inflicted on that July fourth. She added that Cremo is quote, 542 00:35:58,440 --> 00:36:05,760 Speaker 2: irretrievably depraved, permanently incorrigible, irreparably corrupt, and beyond any rehabilitation. 543 00:36:06,480 --> 00:36:11,200 Speaker 2: Prosecutors say Cremo didn't show any regret, and that's it 544 00:36:11,239 --> 00:36:13,840 Speaker 2: for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you 545 00:36:13,840 --> 00:36:16,360 Speaker 2: can always get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg 546 00:36:16,440 --> 00:36:20,040 Speaker 2: Law podcasts. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, 547 00:36:20,239 --> 00:36:25,280 Speaker 2: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, Slash podcast Slash Law, 548 00:36:25,680 --> 00:36:28,240 Speaker 2: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every 549 00:36:28,320 --> 00:36:32,200 Speaker 2: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso 550 00:36:32,360 --> 00:36:33,960 Speaker 2: and you're listening to Bloomberg