1
00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,520
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosseol from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:13,440 --> 00:00:17,360
Speaker 2: This is a proclamation guaranteeing the state's protection against invasion

3
00:00:17,440 --> 00:00:20,080
Speaker 2: based on the current crisis of the Southern border. It

4
00:00:20,120 --> 00:00:23,480
Speaker 2: invokes various executive powers relating to the ongoing invasion at

5
00:00:23,480 --> 00:00:24,160
Speaker 2: the southern border.

6
00:00:25,200 --> 00:00:29,960
Speaker 3: Prominent and President Donald Trump's executive orders, signed hours after

7
00:00:30,040 --> 00:00:34,640
Speaker 3: taking office, were a flood of actions on immigration, from

8
00:00:34,680 --> 00:00:39,200
Speaker 3: declaring a national emergency at the southern border and barring asylum,

9
00:00:39,520 --> 00:00:43,919
Speaker 3: to cracking down on undocumented immigrants already in the country

10
00:00:44,360 --> 00:00:49,360
Speaker 3: and cutting off birthright citizenship, a right enshrined in the Constitution.

11
00:00:50,080 --> 00:00:53,280
Speaker 3: Before the ink was barely dry on the order ending

12
00:00:53,320 --> 00:00:58,440
Speaker 3: birthright citizenship, the first lawsuits against the administration were filed

13
00:00:58,440 --> 00:01:01,960
Speaker 3: by Democratic led state and immigration advocates.

14
00:01:03,000 --> 00:01:04,639
Speaker 1: I have one message for President Trump.

15
00:01:05,720 --> 00:01:06,600
Speaker 4: I'll see you in court.

16
00:01:06,880 --> 00:01:10,960
Speaker 3: Joining me is an expert in immigration law, Leon Fresco. Leon.

17
00:01:11,000 --> 00:01:14,560
Speaker 3: He declared a national emergency at the southern border, and

18
00:01:14,560 --> 00:01:17,120
Speaker 3: he wants to send troops down there. What are the

19
00:01:17,200 --> 00:01:21,080
Speaker 3: parameters for using the military within the country.

20
00:01:21,560 --> 00:01:25,880
Speaker 1: So this has always been an area of considerable legal debate.

21
00:01:26,200 --> 00:01:29,360
Speaker 1: There is no doubt of any kind that troops can

22
00:01:29,400 --> 00:01:34,240
Speaker 1: be sent there for a observation capacity in terms of

23
00:01:34,319 --> 00:01:38,760
Speaker 1: pointing out to domestic law enforcement officials, Hey there's someone

24
00:01:38,840 --> 00:01:42,960
Speaker 1: we've observed crossing, go apprehend them. Now. As to whether

25
00:01:43,000 --> 00:01:48,520
Speaker 1: the troops have actual apprehension authority, this is always debated

26
00:01:48,640 --> 00:01:52,080
Speaker 1: under posse comitatus, where the issue is whether you could

27
00:01:52,120 --> 00:01:55,960
Speaker 1: have the military enforce domestic law inside the border of

28
00:01:56,000 --> 00:01:59,640
Speaker 1: the United States. President Trump and his administration are trying

29
00:01:59,680 --> 00:02:02,360
Speaker 1: to say, what we're trying to do is prevent an invasion.

30
00:02:02,400 --> 00:02:06,560
Speaker 1: We're not trying to actually enforce domestic law. We're trying

31
00:02:06,560 --> 00:02:11,080
Speaker 1: to prevent people from invading US, and so that issue

32
00:02:11,120 --> 00:02:13,800
Speaker 1: will be one of first impression if you actually want

33
00:02:13,840 --> 00:02:18,440
Speaker 1: to litigate this issue whether military people should actually be

34
00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:23,360
Speaker 1: the individuals making arrests at the border. I don't think

35
00:02:23,400 --> 00:02:27,280
Speaker 1: they're necessary given how few people are crossing at the moment,

36
00:02:27,880 --> 00:02:31,240
Speaker 1: So it would be more of an intimidation factor just

37
00:02:31,280 --> 00:02:33,880
Speaker 1: to have the people there. And certainly they can have

38
00:02:34,000 --> 00:02:38,600
Speaker 1: the people there to create that intimidation factor, but whether

39
00:02:38,639 --> 00:02:42,120
Speaker 1: they actually can be the ones who conduct the arrest,

40
00:02:42,800 --> 00:02:44,799
Speaker 1: that's the open legal question.

41
00:02:45,480 --> 00:02:47,080
Speaker 3: Does national guards fit under.

42
00:02:46,919 --> 00:02:50,920
Speaker 1: The National Guarden has the same problem as the actual military,

43
00:02:51,600 --> 00:02:54,240
Speaker 1: and so National Guard always gets sent to the border.

44
00:02:54,240 --> 00:02:56,960
Speaker 1: And then what happens is they get sent there, they

45
00:02:57,000 --> 00:03:01,200
Speaker 1: hold their guns, they create an intimidation factor, they point

46
00:03:01,240 --> 00:03:05,680
Speaker 1: people out to be arrested by this CBP and I

47
00:03:06,200 --> 00:03:10,640
Speaker 1: but they don't actually conduct any immigration law enforcement. And

48
00:03:10,720 --> 00:03:14,280
Speaker 1: that's been the way that has been settled for quite

49
00:03:14,320 --> 00:03:17,119
Speaker 1: a bit of time. But the question is what would

50
00:03:17,200 --> 00:03:20,120
Speaker 1: happen now subsequently if they actually want to have this

51
00:03:20,200 --> 00:03:24,160
Speaker 1: debate about, well, what we want the military to do

52
00:03:24,280 --> 00:03:28,079
Speaker 1: is actually to repel an invasion, what are we permitted

53
00:03:28,120 --> 00:03:30,560
Speaker 1: to do? And I mean, in that world you could

54
00:03:30,600 --> 00:03:33,200
Speaker 1: shoot at people trying to come across the border, because

55
00:03:33,440 --> 00:03:37,400
Speaker 1: if you actually think they're invading you, well that you're right.

56
00:03:37,560 --> 00:03:40,000
Speaker 1: But I mean, that's the question the court they're going

57
00:03:40,040 --> 00:03:41,600
Speaker 1: to have to grapple with. At that point.

58
00:03:42,280 --> 00:03:46,000
Speaker 3: Let's turn to the issue of asylum and refugees. So

59
00:03:46,040 --> 00:03:50,520
Speaker 3: he signed a proclamation to end the asylum process. Is

60
00:03:50,600 --> 00:03:54,240
Speaker 3: that within his purview to end the asylum process?

61
00:03:54,920 --> 00:03:57,400
Speaker 1: So this has been the issue that's been in litigation

62
00:03:57,720 --> 00:04:01,800
Speaker 1: since the first Trump administration and then the Biden administration

63
00:04:01,960 --> 00:04:06,920
Speaker 1: reversed the first Trump's administration's attempt to ban asylum, and

64
00:04:07,000 --> 00:04:09,720
Speaker 1: then near the end of the Biden administration, the Biden

65
00:04:09,720 --> 00:04:15,080
Speaker 1: administration attempted to ban asylum, albeit with two caveats that

66
00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:18,640
Speaker 1: were supposed to distinguish it from the Trump administration. The

67
00:04:18,720 --> 00:04:22,120
Speaker 1: first one is something that was eliminated yesterday which was

68
00:04:22,160 --> 00:04:25,880
Speaker 1: a very big deal, called the CBP one app. And

69
00:04:25,960 --> 00:04:28,039
Speaker 1: so what is the CBP one app. I think this

70
00:04:28,160 --> 00:04:31,600
Speaker 1: is something I've heard a lot about on TV and

71
00:04:31,640 --> 00:04:35,600
Speaker 1: on other podcasts where people misunderstand what's going on. The

72
00:04:35,640 --> 00:04:38,800
Speaker 1: CBP one app is an app that all it's doing

73
00:04:38,960 --> 00:04:43,120
Speaker 1: is is organizing in a coordinated manner, the process by

74
00:04:43,120 --> 00:04:46,960
Speaker 1: which foreign nationals appear at ports of entry along the

75
00:04:47,000 --> 00:04:50,800
Speaker 1: southern border to ask for asylum. So I've heard people say, oh, no,

76
00:04:51,040 --> 00:04:55,760
Speaker 1: this is just ending illegal asylum or whatever else. No, no, no,

77
00:04:56,040 --> 00:04:59,440
Speaker 1: this is ending the actual thing that people are saying

78
00:04:59,480 --> 00:05:02,520
Speaker 1: that you can still theoretically do, which is go to

79
00:05:02,560 --> 00:05:05,240
Speaker 1: the port of entry and ask for asylum. So the

80
00:05:05,279 --> 00:05:07,839
Speaker 1: whole point of the CBP one app is instead of

81
00:05:07,839 --> 00:05:11,000
Speaker 1: having people just show up there willy nilly and create chaos,

82
00:05:11,120 --> 00:05:14,159
Speaker 1: give people an appointment and have them show up in

83
00:05:14,200 --> 00:05:17,640
Speaker 1: a coordinated fashion. Well, that was ended, and so that

84
00:05:17,760 --> 00:05:19,800
Speaker 1: was going to be a main defense to we don't

85
00:05:19,800 --> 00:05:22,720
Speaker 1: have an asylum ban. What we have is a coordinated

86
00:05:22,760 --> 00:05:25,200
Speaker 1: system where you can ask for asylum at the ports

87
00:05:25,240 --> 00:05:28,400
Speaker 1: of entry. No, we don't. That's gone, and so now

88
00:05:28,440 --> 00:05:31,880
Speaker 1: the question is can you actually have an asylum ban?

89
00:05:32,520 --> 00:05:34,880
Speaker 1: And we're back to this issue that we've spoken about

90
00:05:34,880 --> 00:05:38,360
Speaker 1: in prior podcast, which is this is an issue in

91
00:05:38,400 --> 00:05:42,880
Speaker 1: which there is tension between two different statutes. One statue

92
00:05:43,040 --> 00:05:45,760
Speaker 1: says you cannot have an asylum ban. It's the actual

93
00:05:45,800 --> 00:05:48,839
Speaker 1: asylum statute, which says that you're allowed to apply for

94
00:05:48,920 --> 00:05:51,920
Speaker 1: asylum no matter how you entered the country. And then

95
00:05:51,960 --> 00:05:57,240
Speaker 1: there's another statue which gives discretion to limit the factors

96
00:05:57,760 --> 00:06:02,120
Speaker 1: of which one can obtain asylum. And so the question is, yes,

97
00:06:02,240 --> 00:06:05,160
Speaker 1: but can one of those factors that are a discretionary

98
00:06:05,200 --> 00:06:09,640
Speaker 1: factor be illegal crossing when there's another statue that specifically

99
00:06:09,680 --> 00:06:12,200
Speaker 1: says you can apply for asylum even if there's an

100
00:06:12,240 --> 00:06:16,120
Speaker 1: illegal crossing. And so those are the two statutes that

101
00:06:16,200 --> 00:06:18,520
Speaker 1: are intentioned, and we need to get to the Supreme

102
00:06:18,520 --> 00:06:22,400
Speaker 1: Court to figure out which statute wins. We certainly can

103
00:06:22,440 --> 00:06:25,159
Speaker 1: have a scenario where, for instance, you put in a

104
00:06:25,240 --> 00:06:29,960
Speaker 1: discretionary factor where you say, oh, we're denying anyone asylum

105
00:06:30,080 --> 00:06:35,200
Speaker 1: who's ever participated with the trend to agua gang in Venezuela.

106
00:06:35,400 --> 00:06:38,359
Speaker 1: That's fine, you can do that. That certainly makes sense,

107
00:06:38,440 --> 00:06:40,880
Speaker 1: and I don't think any court would overturn that. But

108
00:06:41,000 --> 00:06:44,760
Speaker 1: can you have a wholesale asylum ban as a discretionary

109
00:06:44,839 --> 00:06:49,400
Speaker 1: factor for crossing. I don't think that's going to be permitted,

110
00:06:49,520 --> 00:06:51,920
Speaker 1: because then what's the whole point of the other statute,

111
00:06:52,080 --> 00:06:55,000
Speaker 1: which says that you can apply for asylum regardless of

112
00:06:55,000 --> 00:06:57,800
Speaker 1: if you crossed illegally. But I don't know. I think

113
00:06:57,880 --> 00:06:59,320
Speaker 1: this is going to be a close call in the

114
00:06:59,320 --> 00:07:03,000
Speaker 1: Supreme Court five four either way, and we'll have to see.

115
00:07:03,320 --> 00:07:07,440
Speaker 3: An immigration advocacy group took legal action against the move

116
00:07:07,520 --> 00:07:11,440
Speaker 3: to end the CBP one app filing a motion for

117
00:07:11,480 --> 00:07:15,880
Speaker 3: emergency status in DC District Court, and the lawyer representing

118
00:07:15,920 --> 00:07:19,679
Speaker 3: the ACLU Legal Learned said, whether or not Trump enac's

119
00:07:19,720 --> 00:07:24,520
Speaker 3: additional border policies, the termination of the CBP one appointment

120
00:07:24,640 --> 00:07:27,640
Speaker 3: process means there is now no way for anyone to

121
00:07:27,680 --> 00:07:30,880
Speaker 3: seek asylum at the border, even for families.

122
00:07:31,880 --> 00:07:32,280
Speaker 4: Correct.

123
00:07:32,320 --> 00:07:35,080
Speaker 1: So this was the case. The one in DC was

124
00:07:35,160 --> 00:07:38,840
Speaker 1: the case where the Biden asylum restriction verb being challenged

125
00:07:39,200 --> 00:07:42,080
Speaker 1: because what happened was they had to challenge it in

126
00:07:42,200 --> 00:07:46,040
Speaker 1: DC based upon a previous Supreme Court ruling that happened

127
00:07:46,080 --> 00:07:49,120
Speaker 1: in the Biden administration, which said, if you want to

128
00:07:49,200 --> 00:07:53,640
Speaker 1: challenge these things, there's no nationwide injunctions that you can

129
00:07:53,680 --> 00:07:56,800
Speaker 1: get in a specific case like this. You have to go,

130
00:07:57,240 --> 00:08:00,160
Speaker 1: you know, district by district, and you have to this

131
00:08:00,360 --> 00:08:03,560
Speaker 1: specific statutory authority. So they had to go to DC

132
00:08:03,720 --> 00:08:06,560
Speaker 1: because there's an actual statue which talks about when you're

133
00:08:06,600 --> 00:08:10,000
Speaker 1: doing this kind of asylum ban in what's called the

134
00:08:10,040 --> 00:08:14,160
Speaker 1: expedited removal process, you have to challenge anything in that

135
00:08:14,280 --> 00:08:17,080
Speaker 1: process in DC. So they went to DC, and the

136
00:08:17,120 --> 00:08:21,520
Speaker 1: Biden administration they've gone for a full summary judgment, not

137
00:08:21,600 --> 00:08:25,240
Speaker 1: an injunction, because there's some question about whether a court

138
00:08:25,280 --> 00:08:27,680
Speaker 1: can issue an injunction. So they said, forget about that,

139
00:08:27,800 --> 00:08:30,679
Speaker 1: let's just ask for some rejudgment saying that the Biden

140
00:08:31,160 --> 00:08:35,320
Speaker 1: asylum regulations were illegal. That was about to be decided,

141
00:08:35,400 --> 00:08:38,640
Speaker 1: But now we have the Trump asylum regulations, which are

142
00:08:38,679 --> 00:08:42,920
Speaker 1: even more stringent than the Biden asylum regulations, or rather

143
00:08:43,040 --> 00:08:46,320
Speaker 1: executive orders is what they both are. And so in

144
00:08:46,360 --> 00:08:49,520
Speaker 1: this situation, what the ACLU is saying is you have

145
00:08:49,640 --> 00:08:51,640
Speaker 1: to take whatever you were going to do under Biden,

146
00:08:51,720 --> 00:08:55,240
Speaker 1: which we thought was illegal, and add the Trump parts

147
00:08:55,320 --> 00:08:59,199
Speaker 1: which were taking away the mitigating defenses of what Biden

148
00:08:59,360 --> 00:09:01,880
Speaker 1: was saying. Because what Biden was saying is, yes, we

149
00:09:01,960 --> 00:09:04,520
Speaker 1: have asylum, but it has to be at the port

150
00:09:04,520 --> 00:09:07,520
Speaker 1: of entry, organized under CBP one, and we should be

151
00:09:07,559 --> 00:09:09,600
Speaker 1: allowed to do that, but we should be allowed to

152
00:09:09,640 --> 00:09:12,920
Speaker 1: have an organized process where people ask for asylum. But

153
00:09:12,960 --> 00:09:16,120
Speaker 1: if you actually take away the organized process part and

154
00:09:16,240 --> 00:09:18,839
Speaker 1: you have no process, it appears to me that it

155
00:09:18,880 --> 00:09:21,760
Speaker 1: would be easier for the acl YOU to win the litigation.

156
00:09:21,920 --> 00:09:23,120
Speaker 1: But we'll have to wait and see.

157
00:09:23,880 --> 00:09:26,880
Speaker 3: Let's talk about deportations. In his speech, he said, we'll

158
00:09:26,880 --> 00:09:29,880
Speaker 3: begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal

159
00:09:29,920 --> 00:09:33,719
Speaker 3: aliens back to the places from which they came. And

160
00:09:34,240 --> 00:09:37,800
Speaker 3: when he was signing orders in the Oval office, they

161
00:09:37,800 --> 00:09:39,920
Speaker 3: asked him about whether there would be raids and he said,

162
00:09:39,920 --> 00:09:42,360
Speaker 3: there have to be raids. I'm not telling you when,

163
00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:43,800
Speaker 3: but there have to be. I mean, what does he

164
00:09:43,880 --> 00:09:46,160
Speaker 3: intend as far as deportations.

165
00:09:46,800 --> 00:09:50,560
Speaker 1: Well, in terms of the actual operations, we're still not

166
00:09:50,640 --> 00:09:52,960
Speaker 1: at the point where you're seeing those on X or

167
00:09:53,000 --> 00:09:56,400
Speaker 1: Twitter or blue Sky or whatever. We're not at that

168
00:09:56,559 --> 00:10:00,200
Speaker 1: point yet, but what we are going to likely see

169
00:10:00,800 --> 00:10:04,560
Speaker 1: are operations where there are known individuals who already have

170
00:10:04,880 --> 00:10:09,800
Speaker 1: final orders of removal or who already have basically criminal

171
00:10:09,880 --> 00:10:12,960
Speaker 1: convictions that allow them to have a very quick order

172
00:10:13,000 --> 00:10:15,839
Speaker 1: of removal. We know about the criminal conviction, we hadn't

173
00:10:15,840 --> 00:10:19,800
Speaker 1: put them through the immigration process. Those people, there's going

174
00:10:19,880 --> 00:10:23,440
Speaker 1: to be some home operations, but actually what you're going

175
00:10:23,520 --> 00:10:27,080
Speaker 1: to see more of is operations in places like workplaces

176
00:10:27,120 --> 00:10:31,120
Speaker 1: and other public places, so that it creates a larger

177
00:10:31,200 --> 00:10:34,440
Speaker 1: ripple effect of people getting worried about where can I

178
00:10:34,559 --> 00:10:37,480
Speaker 1: go and not be subject to an operation, And the

179
00:10:37,559 --> 00:10:40,280
Speaker 1: idea is that that would encourage people to self support

180
00:10:40,360 --> 00:10:42,680
Speaker 1: because they would be nervous that they might be subject

181
00:10:42,720 --> 00:10:46,920
Speaker 1: to an operation. But those operations, in order to make

182
00:10:46,960 --> 00:10:49,120
Speaker 1: sure it's not just people you're holding and you're not

183
00:10:49,160 --> 00:10:52,120
Speaker 1: going to be able to remove, are limited still to

184
00:10:52,160 --> 00:10:55,800
Speaker 1: people with criminal convictions or prior orders of removal, and

185
00:10:55,880 --> 00:10:59,920
Speaker 1: so that's where people have to understand that I see

186
00:11:00,200 --> 00:11:02,160
Speaker 1: operating under some constraints there.

187
00:11:02,520 --> 00:11:07,040
Speaker 3: He's expected to give new authority to the Immigration Customs

188
00:11:07,160 --> 00:11:12,760
Speaker 3: Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection officers to carry out deportations.

189
00:11:13,120 --> 00:11:15,360
Speaker 1: Yes, So here's what that is. So there is a

190
00:11:15,480 --> 00:11:19,880
Speaker 1: statute called the expedited Removal Statue which says that if

191
00:11:19,920 --> 00:11:23,600
Speaker 1: you are within one hundred miles of the US border,

192
00:11:24,000 --> 00:11:26,480
Speaker 1: which believe it or not, actually covers a very large

193
00:11:26,520 --> 00:11:30,880
Speaker 1: portion of the country because that's any border, any water border,

194
00:11:31,280 --> 00:11:35,200
Speaker 1: any land border, So the northern border, the western Ocean,

195
00:11:35,640 --> 00:11:39,000
Speaker 1: the Eastern Ocean, the southern Ocean. You take one hundred

196
00:11:39,000 --> 00:11:41,760
Speaker 1: miles in any direction and you're within the area where

197
00:11:41,800 --> 00:11:44,560
Speaker 1: you could be subject to expedite of removal. And so

198
00:11:44,600 --> 00:11:46,840
Speaker 1: if you are within one hundred miles of any border,

199
00:11:47,280 --> 00:11:51,560
Speaker 1: plus you've been here less than two years, then the

200
00:11:51,640 --> 00:11:54,160
Speaker 1: government doesn't need to take you through the normal removal

201
00:11:54,200 --> 00:11:57,440
Speaker 1: process where there's a hearing, and that hearing is six

202
00:11:57,559 --> 00:12:00,680
Speaker 1: years from now. Because there's a million persons backlog at

203
00:12:00,720 --> 00:12:03,600
Speaker 1: immigration court, they can just literally give you an order,

204
00:12:03,760 --> 00:12:06,320
Speaker 1: put you on the plane, and take you out unless

205
00:12:06,360 --> 00:12:09,080
Speaker 1: you say that you need asylum, and then you have

206
00:12:09,120 --> 00:12:11,480
Speaker 1: to have a credible fear that you establish and if not,

207
00:12:11,840 --> 00:12:15,000
Speaker 1: they can take you out. Now, the Biden administration and

208
00:12:15,080 --> 00:12:19,200
Speaker 1: other administrations have limited that authority to fourteen days as

209
00:12:19,200 --> 00:12:22,560
Speaker 1: opposed to two years. They self limited that because what

210
00:12:22,600 --> 00:12:24,320
Speaker 1: they're trying to say is, look, we're trying to limit

211
00:12:24,360 --> 00:12:27,960
Speaker 1: this to people we literally see coming across the border,

212
00:12:28,400 --> 00:12:31,000
Speaker 1: because how will we know if someone's been here two

213
00:12:31,080 --> 00:12:32,800
Speaker 1: years or not. That's going to create a lot of

214
00:12:32,840 --> 00:12:37,240
Speaker 1: litigation that's going to create problems. If we can actually show, hey,

215
00:12:37,440 --> 00:12:42,280
Speaker 1: Agent Smith observed this person coming across, then that's one thing.

216
00:12:42,720 --> 00:12:45,000
Speaker 1: But if we can't actually do that, then how do

217
00:12:45,080 --> 00:12:47,600
Speaker 1: we know they haven't been here two years? And that's

218
00:12:47,600 --> 00:12:51,839
Speaker 1: where you start having this very problematic situation where you

219
00:12:51,960 --> 00:12:56,559
Speaker 1: start reinserting potential areas of litigation that have been actually

220
00:12:56,960 --> 00:12:58,840
Speaker 1: ruled in favor of the government. So right now, the

221
00:12:58,840 --> 00:13:03,160
Speaker 1: government has pretty expanded into authorities on expedited removal where

222
00:13:03,320 --> 00:13:06,360
Speaker 1: they can't be challenged in federal courts. But if they

223
00:13:06,400 --> 00:13:08,760
Speaker 1: start getting into this scenario where a bunch of people

224
00:13:08,800 --> 00:13:10,800
Speaker 1: start saying, oh, I've been here for more than two

225
00:13:10,840 --> 00:13:14,360
Speaker 1: years and you're trying to deport me, then if the

226
00:13:14,400 --> 00:13:18,439
Speaker 1: government is seemed to be abusing this, this may reopen

227
00:13:18,520 --> 00:13:20,319
Speaker 1: the courts may say well, wait a second, we need

228
00:13:20,720 --> 00:13:23,920
Speaker 1: a vehicle where people can challenge this and then that

229
00:13:24,080 --> 00:13:26,880
Speaker 1: same vehicle can start getting used to challenge other parts

230
00:13:26,880 --> 00:13:30,080
Speaker 1: of the expedited removal process. So that's why people haven't

231
00:13:30,080 --> 00:13:34,360
Speaker 1: wanted to open that door. But if the Trump administration says, look,

232
00:13:34,400 --> 00:13:37,440
Speaker 1: we want to reopen that door, and we're fine doing it,

233
00:13:37,480 --> 00:13:40,000
Speaker 1: and we have the best environment we've ever had in

234
00:13:40,040 --> 00:13:43,360
Speaker 1: the courts to do this in then it's possible that

235
00:13:43,400 --> 00:13:47,640
Speaker 1: they may actually I mean, they will give themselves the authorities,

236
00:13:48,040 --> 00:13:51,679
Speaker 1: but whether they actually start implementing this in practice and saying, look,

237
00:13:52,000 --> 00:13:54,200
Speaker 1: we think this person's been here for one year in

238
00:13:54,240 --> 00:13:57,200
Speaker 1: six months, but we can just grab them and immediately

239
00:13:57,240 --> 00:13:58,920
Speaker 1: put them on a plane and not have to give

240
00:13:58,960 --> 00:14:02,560
Speaker 1: them any due process. That's going to be very interesting

241
00:14:02,600 --> 00:14:03,600
Speaker 1: to see if that happens.

242
00:14:03,880 --> 00:14:06,840
Speaker 3: Speaking about putting them on a plane, where can they

243
00:14:06,840 --> 00:14:07,960
Speaker 3: put them on a plane too?

244
00:14:08,000 --> 00:14:11,240
Speaker 1: At this point, that's another question. Is there's going to

245
00:14:11,320 --> 00:14:13,600
Speaker 1: have to be countries that are willing to accept them.

246
00:14:14,000 --> 00:14:16,520
Speaker 1: I just read earlier today on Bloomberg News, which is

247
00:14:16,520 --> 00:14:20,320
Speaker 1: obviously the best news source that there is, about India

248
00:14:20,520 --> 00:14:23,560
Speaker 1: saying that it's going to work with the United States

249
00:14:23,560 --> 00:14:28,000
Speaker 1: to repatriate people that weren't previously being repatriated to India.

250
00:14:28,440 --> 00:14:31,920
Speaker 1: And so that's one example where sort of President Trump

251
00:14:31,920 --> 00:14:35,120
Speaker 1: has this mythical ability to bend reality to his will.

252
00:14:35,600 --> 00:14:38,840
Speaker 1: And India wasn't accepting these people previously, and so now

253
00:14:38,880 --> 00:14:41,720
Speaker 1: it may accept them. And certainly President Trump has been

254
00:14:41,760 --> 00:14:46,120
Speaker 1: threatening other countries who don't accept US deporties that they

255
00:14:46,160 --> 00:14:49,320
Speaker 1: will create all kinds of other sanctions on them. And

256
00:14:49,400 --> 00:14:52,640
Speaker 1: so if that works, if the India example is one

257
00:14:52,680 --> 00:14:55,680
Speaker 1: example of this, then we may see others where President

258
00:14:55,680 --> 00:14:59,200
Speaker 1: Trump ends up being very successful getting countries to accept

259
00:14:59,200 --> 00:15:02,160
Speaker 1: people that were to the board that we previously weren't

260
00:15:02,160 --> 00:15:03,200
Speaker 1: successful in having.

261
00:15:03,240 --> 00:15:07,080
Speaker 3: That happened coming up the lawsuits against Trump's order ending

262
00:15:07,160 --> 00:15:12,000
Speaker 3: birthright citizenship, this is bloomberg. On his first day in office,

263
00:15:12,080 --> 00:15:17,000
Speaker 3: President Donald Trump signed sweeping executive actions designed to crack

264
00:15:17,080 --> 00:15:22,520
Speaker 3: down on illegal border crossings and target undocumented migrants already

265
00:15:22,520 --> 00:15:25,600
Speaker 3: in the country. One of his high profile orders was

266
00:15:25,640 --> 00:15:29,280
Speaker 3: to end birthright citizenship, which says children born in the

267
00:15:29,360 --> 00:15:33,840
Speaker 3: United States are US citizens under the fourteenth Amendment to

268
00:15:33,880 --> 00:15:38,400
Speaker 3: the Constitution. That order led to democratic state attorneys general

269
00:15:38,560 --> 00:15:43,440
Speaker 3: and immigration advocates launching the first suits against the Trump administration.

270
00:15:44,000 --> 00:15:47,560
Speaker 3: New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin says he's confident that

271
00:15:47,760 --> 00:15:50,720
Speaker 3: order is never going to take effect because it's so

272
00:15:50,920 --> 00:15:52,520
Speaker 3: clearly unconstitutional.

273
00:15:52,920 --> 00:15:54,760
Speaker 5: The reason why you put something in the constitution, the

274
00:15:54,800 --> 00:15:56,480
Speaker 5: reason why we talk about rule of law. This is

275
00:15:56,480 --> 00:16:00,360
Speaker 5: not an abstract concept. It's so that President, Congress, the

276
00:16:00,440 --> 00:16:04,960
Speaker 5: majority cannot simply change a right on a whim. This

277
00:16:05,080 --> 00:16:07,680
Speaker 5: is a right that was codified in one of the

278
00:16:07,680 --> 00:16:11,640
Speaker 5: most important amendments ever codified in our nation's nearly two

279
00:16:11,680 --> 00:16:13,080
Speaker 5: and a half century history.

280
00:16:13,320 --> 00:16:17,040
Speaker 3: I've been talking to immigration law expert Leon Fresco this

281
00:16:17,200 --> 00:16:21,920
Speaker 3: before because Trump has been promising to end birthright citizenship

282
00:16:22,240 --> 00:16:26,280
Speaker 3: for some time. So tell us about this executive order.

283
00:16:26,560 --> 00:16:29,000
Speaker 1: Previously we talked about it in the theoretical. Now we

284
00:16:29,040 --> 00:16:32,960
Speaker 1: actually have the executive order, and the executive order is

285
00:16:33,000 --> 00:16:36,440
Speaker 1: actually not very detailed. So what it just says is,

286
00:16:37,080 --> 00:16:41,320
Speaker 1: in thirty days, the administration is to not give the

287
00:16:41,680 --> 00:16:46,760
Speaker 1: accoutrement of citizenship, meaning pass forward social Security numbers, et cetera,

288
00:16:47,320 --> 00:16:50,720
Speaker 1: to people who are born in the United States unless

289
00:16:50,800 --> 00:16:53,720
Speaker 1: one of their parents is either a citizen or a

290
00:16:53,840 --> 00:16:57,800
Speaker 1: lawful permanent resident. Period. If this executive order is not

291
00:16:58,040 --> 00:17:01,080
Speaker 1: enjoyed by the court, then what would happened. Is any

292
00:17:01,160 --> 00:17:05,080
Speaker 1: future person applying for a US passport, for instance, you

293
00:17:05,119 --> 00:17:08,560
Speaker 1: would need to show that not just you were born here,

294
00:17:08,640 --> 00:17:10,359
Speaker 1: which is all you have to show. Now you just

295
00:17:10,400 --> 00:17:12,800
Speaker 1: show your birth certificate, which is given to you by

296
00:17:12,800 --> 00:17:15,760
Speaker 1: the hospital. Now that wouldn't be enough. You would need

297
00:17:15,800 --> 00:17:20,639
Speaker 1: to show a birth certificate either before February twentieth, twenty

298
00:17:20,680 --> 00:17:23,400
Speaker 1: twenty five, that would be one way, or you would

299
00:17:23,440 --> 00:17:26,440
Speaker 1: need to show a birth certificate after February twentieth of

300
00:17:26,520 --> 00:17:30,760
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, and proof of one of your parents'

301
00:17:30,760 --> 00:17:33,560
Speaker 1: green cards or one of their passports, or one of

302
00:17:33,600 --> 00:17:37,679
Speaker 1: their birth certificates, something of that nature. And the question

303
00:17:37,880 --> 00:17:41,479
Speaker 1: is will that actually be implemented. And here is where

304
00:17:42,040 --> 00:17:44,200
Speaker 1: we go to the legal theory, which is that under

305
00:17:44,240 --> 00:17:48,400
Speaker 1: the fourteenth Amendment, the fourteenth Amendment very clearly says anybody

306
00:17:48,520 --> 00:17:52,840
Speaker 1: born here is a US citizen unless you're not subject

307
00:17:52,840 --> 00:17:57,119
Speaker 1: to the jurisdiction of the US laws. And that was

308
00:17:57,160 --> 00:17:59,359
Speaker 1: done as part of the fourteenth Amendment in order to

309
00:17:59,520 --> 00:18:03,359
Speaker 1: end slavery, where people who were born here were allowed

310
00:18:03,400 --> 00:18:06,320
Speaker 1: to be slaves and didn't have the full rights of citizenships.

311
00:18:06,480 --> 00:18:10,000
Speaker 1: So the fourteenth Amendment ended that, it said everybody born

312
00:18:10,040 --> 00:18:12,800
Speaker 1: here has the full rights of citizenship. No one can

313
00:18:12,840 --> 00:18:16,280
Speaker 1: be given a second class citizenship that can lead them

314
00:18:16,320 --> 00:18:19,960
Speaker 1: to be put into slavery or some other second class status.

315
00:18:20,000 --> 00:18:23,880
Speaker 1: And so from that standpoint, the only way to eliminate

316
00:18:24,080 --> 00:18:28,439
Speaker 1: birthright citizenship without changing the Constitution is to make a

317
00:18:28,480 --> 00:18:32,240
Speaker 1: determination that people who are born here that you're trying

318
00:18:32,280 --> 00:18:36,040
Speaker 1: to eliminate this from are not subject to the jurisdiction

319
00:18:36,160 --> 00:18:39,680
Speaker 1: of the United States. Well, that's what this executive order says,

320
00:18:40,200 --> 00:18:42,560
Speaker 1: but is that really true. I mean, that would mean

321
00:18:43,040 --> 00:18:45,879
Speaker 1: that they're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

322
00:18:45,880 --> 00:18:49,919
Speaker 1: I actually tweeted earlier today, I said, for the moment,

323
00:18:50,680 --> 00:18:54,000
Speaker 1: if you are a criminal defense attorney and you have

324
00:18:54,119 --> 00:18:57,120
Speaker 1: a client in federal court and they are not a

325
00:18:57,160 --> 00:19:00,960
Speaker 1: Green card holder or they are not a US citizen,

326
00:19:01,560 --> 00:19:04,760
Speaker 1: then you, I think, would be very close to committing

327
00:19:04,800 --> 00:19:09,000
Speaker 1: malpractice if you don't file emotion to dismiss saying that

328
00:19:09,080 --> 00:19:13,000
Speaker 1: at the moment, the current administration believes that my client

329
00:19:13,080 --> 00:19:15,919
Speaker 1: is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,

330
00:19:15,960 --> 00:19:20,159
Speaker 1: meaning we can't criminally prosecute this person because they're not

331
00:19:20,240 --> 00:19:23,480
Speaker 1: subject to our jurisdiction. And so that is an unintended

332
00:19:23,520 --> 00:19:28,040
Speaker 1: consequence here, and is that really something that the administration

333
00:19:28,160 --> 00:19:31,320
Speaker 1: is comfortable with. I really don't know, and I don't

334
00:19:31,359 --> 00:19:34,240
Speaker 1: know how you can make someone subject to the jurisdiction

335
00:19:34,400 --> 00:19:37,919
Speaker 1: for crimes but not subject to the jurisdiction for citizenship.

336
00:19:38,000 --> 00:19:40,920
Speaker 1: That word either means what it means or it doesn't,

337
00:19:41,240 --> 00:19:47,160
Speaker 1: which means typically diplomatic immunity. So diplomats and their children

338
00:19:47,720 --> 00:19:51,280
Speaker 1: are usually the ones interpreted under this statute and this

339
00:19:51,400 --> 00:19:55,880
Speaker 1: constitutional provision to be the ones exempted from birthright citizenship,

340
00:19:56,240 --> 00:19:57,600
Speaker 1: but not anyone else.

341
00:19:58,000 --> 00:20:02,800
Speaker 3: Democratic Attorney's General file two sets of lawsuits to strike

342
00:20:02,880 --> 00:20:06,280
Speaker 3: down this executive order. Tell us about the grounds for

343
00:20:06,320 --> 00:20:07,200
Speaker 3: their lawsuits.

344
00:20:07,480 --> 00:20:09,840
Speaker 1: Their argument is that this cannot be changed via an

345
00:20:09,880 --> 00:20:13,879
Speaker 1: executive order, that there's a constitutional provision and actually a

346
00:20:13,920 --> 00:20:17,520
Speaker 1: statute which codifies the constitutional provision, So there's actually two

347
00:20:17,520 --> 00:20:21,440
Speaker 1: different legal authorities here, and that both of them mean

348
00:20:21,880 --> 00:20:24,960
Speaker 1: that the only people exempt from this are diplomats and

349
00:20:25,000 --> 00:20:28,280
Speaker 1: the children of diplomats. It's not other people. And so

350
00:20:28,480 --> 00:20:32,120
Speaker 1: the executive order would be ultra virus. And so they're

351
00:20:32,160 --> 00:20:35,560
Speaker 1: all representing that they have people in their state or

352
00:20:35,560 --> 00:20:38,159
Speaker 1: in their organization, et cetera that are going to have

353
00:20:38,280 --> 00:20:42,160
Speaker 1: children after February twentieth of twenty twenty five, and those

354
00:20:42,280 --> 00:20:44,720
Speaker 1: children will not have U as citizenship, so they will

355
00:20:44,720 --> 00:20:47,080
Speaker 1: be harmed by this. And then some of the interesting

356
00:20:47,160 --> 00:20:50,520
Speaker 1: arguments they make is there are some countries where if

357
00:20:50,560 --> 00:20:54,200
Speaker 1: you're born in another country you might be considered stateless.

358
00:20:54,240 --> 00:20:57,679
Speaker 1: They may not give you their citizenship either, And so

359
00:20:57,760 --> 00:21:00,840
Speaker 1: what are these poor kids supposed to do they being stateless.

360
00:21:01,000 --> 00:21:03,399
Speaker 1: This is, by the way, not just a problem for

361
00:21:03,480 --> 00:21:06,520
Speaker 1: people who are undocumented. The way the executive Order is

362
00:21:06,520 --> 00:21:10,280
Speaker 1: written again, it will be the children of anybody who

363
00:21:10,320 --> 00:21:14,320
Speaker 1: doesn't have a Green Card or a US passport, Meaning

364
00:21:14,600 --> 00:21:17,640
Speaker 1: there's millions of people here on other kinds of work

365
00:21:17,720 --> 00:21:21,520
Speaker 1: visas that their children will not have US citizenship if

366
00:21:21,520 --> 00:21:24,960
Speaker 1: they're born here, which previously was the case, which will

367
00:21:25,040 --> 00:21:28,600
Speaker 1: mean that if those people want to stay in the US,

368
00:21:28,680 --> 00:21:32,440
Speaker 1: ultimately those children will be in a limbo where it's

369
00:21:32,480 --> 00:21:34,720
Speaker 1: not clear what their citizenship status will be.

370
00:21:35,440 --> 00:21:40,520
Speaker 3: The Supreme Court affirmed birthright citizenship in one case way

371
00:21:40,560 --> 00:21:43,760
Speaker 3: back in eighteen ninety eight, and it seems like the

372
00:21:43,800 --> 00:21:48,560
Speaker 3: Democratic ags have a good case against this executive order.

373
00:21:49,200 --> 00:21:52,480
Speaker 1: If I were a chech GPP or a computer judge

374
00:21:52,520 --> 00:21:55,359
Speaker 1: or an AI judge or a robot judge. I would

375
00:21:55,400 --> 00:21:59,400
Speaker 1: put the statistical odds of this being enjoyed that are

376
00:21:59,520 --> 00:22:04,000
Speaker 1: very very high numerical percentage. But because human beings are

377
00:22:04,040 --> 00:22:06,760
Speaker 1: involved and you just never know, you can never say

378
00:22:06,840 --> 00:22:10,240
Speaker 1: for sure that you are certain that this won't get enjoined.

379
00:22:10,280 --> 00:22:12,360
Speaker 1: But I do think it will very likely to get

380
00:22:12,440 --> 00:22:15,919
Speaker 1: enjoined in the lower court and in the courts of appeals.

381
00:22:16,200 --> 00:22:17,919
Speaker 1: And then the question is if this goes to the

382
00:22:17,960 --> 00:22:21,400
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, would there really be five judges that say

383
00:22:21,440 --> 00:22:25,359
Speaker 1: you could overturn birthright citizenship BAIA an executive order? And

384
00:22:25,560 --> 00:22:29,320
Speaker 1: I'm very skeptical of that, But since one can never

385
00:22:29,359 --> 00:22:30,960
Speaker 1: guarantee anything, you just never know.

386
00:22:31,680 --> 00:22:36,080
Speaker 3: One of his orders target sanctuary cities that refuse to

387
00:22:36,119 --> 00:22:41,080
Speaker 3: cooperate with I spy, restricting federal funds and potentially taking

388
00:22:41,200 --> 00:22:44,879
Speaker 3: legal action against them. During his first administration, weren't there

389
00:22:45,000 --> 00:22:46,720
Speaker 3: legal actions related to his.

390
00:22:47,359 --> 00:22:50,879
Speaker 1: His n What happened was there were these initiatives to

391
00:22:50,960 --> 00:22:55,720
Speaker 1: take away DOJ police funding and other detention funding and

392
00:22:55,760 --> 00:22:58,520
Speaker 1: other federal funding that had to do with with law

393
00:22:58,600 --> 00:23:02,640
Speaker 1: enforcement from city that did not report when they had

394
00:23:02,720 --> 00:23:06,800
Speaker 1: people arrested who are not in status to the federal government.

395
00:23:06,880 --> 00:23:10,400
Speaker 1: Those are what's called spectuary cities or states are places

396
00:23:10,400 --> 00:23:14,720
Speaker 1: where if there's a foreign nationals who's arrested, those foreign

397
00:23:14,760 --> 00:23:18,120
Speaker 1: nationals aren't reported to ICE, and that they don't let

398
00:23:18,160 --> 00:23:21,600
Speaker 1: ICE go into the jails to determine if there's foreign

399
00:23:21,680 --> 00:23:25,360
Speaker 1: nationals in there that can be removed when their prison

400
00:23:25,440 --> 00:23:29,119
Speaker 1: sentences or their jail terms are up. And so the

401
00:23:29,160 --> 00:23:31,080
Speaker 1: point was, if you're not going to allow us to

402
00:23:31,119 --> 00:23:34,600
Speaker 1: do that, you shouldn't get federal funding for police. Those

403
00:23:34,720 --> 00:23:37,560
Speaker 1: cases were litigated and pretty much the states in the

404
00:23:37,600 --> 00:23:42,240
Speaker 1: cities won in those litigations, but that was because they

405
00:23:42,240 --> 00:23:45,880
Speaker 1: were executive orders like these were. What will be interesting

406
00:23:46,000 --> 00:23:48,679
Speaker 1: is that now that there is control over the Congress

407
00:23:49,119 --> 00:23:51,600
Speaker 1: and we're seeing things like the Lake and Riley ACKs

408
00:23:51,680 --> 00:23:56,000
Speaker 1: pass with some democratic health, can you actually get sixty vote,

409
00:23:56,480 --> 00:24:00,000
Speaker 1: meaning there would be some democratic support for the principles

410
00:23:59,880 --> 00:24:03,760
Speaker 1: that a sanctuary city should have their grants taken away

411
00:24:04,160 --> 00:24:07,720
Speaker 1: because they're once it's not just an executive order, but

412
00:24:07,800 --> 00:24:14,840
Speaker 1: it's Congress actually limiting funds to localities that it is appropriating.

413
00:24:15,520 --> 00:24:17,800
Speaker 1: Then the claims are going to be much harder to

414
00:24:17,840 --> 00:24:20,760
Speaker 1: win in litigation by the states and the city. So

415
00:24:21,119 --> 00:24:24,399
Speaker 1: for now, if it's executive orders, yes, the point is

416
00:24:24,440 --> 00:24:27,800
Speaker 1: being made. There will be the same litigation. The litigation

417
00:24:27,960 --> 00:24:31,840
Speaker 1: is likely to be successful and the refusal to give

418
00:24:31,880 --> 00:24:35,679
Speaker 1: the funding will be overturned. But the long term battle

419
00:24:35,720 --> 00:24:38,560
Speaker 1: here is going to be will there be bipartisan votes

420
00:24:39,000 --> 00:24:42,159
Speaker 1: for actually eliminating funding to sanctuary cities.

421
00:24:42,480 --> 00:24:46,360
Speaker 3: He has one order that instructs federal agencies to identify

422
00:24:46,480 --> 00:24:51,560
Speaker 3: countries that don't provide sufficient information about their citizens for

423
00:24:51,680 --> 00:24:54,359
Speaker 3: the US to be able to vet and screen them.

424
00:24:55,320 --> 00:24:59,520
Speaker 1: Yes, that is the old travel band statute. If you remember.

425
00:24:59,200 --> 00:25:01,000
Speaker 3: That, it would be hard to forget.

426
00:25:01,480 --> 00:25:04,080
Speaker 1: Last time, in the first Trump administration, they were there

427
00:25:04,160 --> 00:25:06,400
Speaker 1: was the ban first, and then all the questions were

428
00:25:06,400 --> 00:25:09,120
Speaker 1: asked later, and so that's what led to a lot

429
00:25:09,160 --> 00:25:13,480
Speaker 1: of litigation. And then finally, after many iterations of the band,

430
00:25:13,920 --> 00:25:18,000
Speaker 1: the final ban was upheld because the questions were asked first,

431
00:25:18,040 --> 00:25:20,760
Speaker 1: and then the final band was written. So this time

432
00:25:21,119 --> 00:25:25,120
Speaker 1: they agree, let's ask the questions first, let's do the investigation,

433
00:25:25,560 --> 00:25:27,919
Speaker 1: then we'll come back and do the band. And so

434
00:25:27,960 --> 00:25:30,399
Speaker 1: they're going to ask the questions first, which countries are

435
00:25:30,520 --> 00:25:34,040
Speaker 1: unsafe or we don't know who is who, or when

436
00:25:34,080 --> 00:25:36,359
Speaker 1: we get information from them. This could all be fake

437
00:25:36,600 --> 00:25:39,400
Speaker 1: or whatever. And then if we can figure out which

438
00:25:39,400 --> 00:25:41,880
Speaker 1: country should go on a list like that, then there

439
00:25:41,920 --> 00:25:44,600
Speaker 1: will be a travel band put in place for people

440
00:25:44,600 --> 00:25:45,600
Speaker 1: from those countries.

441
00:25:46,359 --> 00:25:50,360
Speaker 3: Also, he wants to complete the building of the wall

442
00:25:50,400 --> 00:25:54,639
Speaker 3: along the Mexico US border. How much wall was built

443
00:25:54,680 --> 00:25:56,400
Speaker 3: and how much has to be built.

444
00:25:57,040 --> 00:26:00,520
Speaker 1: Well, again, this depends on what you consider wall and

445
00:26:00,640 --> 00:26:03,000
Speaker 1: what will be the final product. And do you consider

446
00:26:03,400 --> 00:26:07,439
Speaker 1: barriers that are there now that are not wall like

447
00:26:07,720 --> 00:26:10,840
Speaker 1: barriers to be considered part of the wall. So all

448
00:26:10,880 --> 00:26:13,000
Speaker 1: of this is in the eye of the beholder. But

449
00:26:13,119 --> 00:26:16,920
Speaker 1: let's say that, without any controversy of any kind, there's

450
00:26:16,920 --> 00:26:19,760
Speaker 1: at least five hundred miles that are completely wide open,

451
00:26:20,040 --> 00:26:23,399
Speaker 1: and then there's another five hundred or so miles that

452
00:26:23,560 --> 00:26:28,240
Speaker 1: have some kind of substandard barrier that probably President Trump,

453
00:26:28,280 --> 00:26:31,600
Speaker 1: if he were talking about the big, beautiful wall, would

454
00:26:31,640 --> 00:26:34,000
Speaker 1: not think that that would qualify because it would be

455
00:26:34,640 --> 00:26:38,520
Speaker 1: traversible barriers that might be there to prevent vehicles or

456
00:26:38,520 --> 00:26:41,760
Speaker 1: something of that nature, but that's to prevent an industrious

457
00:26:41,800 --> 00:26:44,480
Speaker 1: person from traversing the walls. Can it be done?

458
00:26:44,560 --> 00:26:44,760
Speaker 5: Yet?

459
00:26:44,800 --> 00:26:47,040
Speaker 1: It can be done. There's been litigation on this that

460
00:26:47,160 --> 00:26:50,040
Speaker 1: you can declare a national emergency, you can repurpose the

461
00:26:50,520 --> 00:26:54,280
Speaker 1: military funds for the wall. And then the only thing

462
00:26:54,320 --> 00:26:57,199
Speaker 1: that had happened in the prior administration was all of

463
00:26:57,240 --> 00:27:00,240
Speaker 1: that got decided way too late, and so at the

464
00:27:00,280 --> 00:27:04,280
Speaker 1: time the money started being used, the administration was over.

465
00:27:04,440 --> 00:27:07,480
Speaker 1: So now the point is start on day one and

466
00:27:07,520 --> 00:27:10,080
Speaker 1: the idea is well, then hopefully by the end of

467
00:27:10,119 --> 00:27:15,000
Speaker 1: the administration, you would have your two thousand mile complete

468
00:27:15,080 --> 00:27:18,560
Speaker 1: wall of the southern border. And so that's the intent,

469
00:27:18,720 --> 00:27:21,280
Speaker 1: that's what they say they're going to do. Let's see

470
00:27:21,480 --> 00:27:23,960
Speaker 1: what actually happens over the next four years.

471
00:27:24,080 --> 00:27:25,919
Speaker 3: I have a feeling there is going to be a

472
00:27:25,960 --> 00:27:30,159
Speaker 3: lot of litigation over immigration issues. Thanks so much, Leon.

473
00:27:30,720 --> 00:27:33,920
Speaker 3: That's Leon Fresco, a partner at Holland and Knight. Coming

474
00:27:34,000 --> 00:27:37,400
Speaker 3: up next on the Bloomberg Lawn Show. Trump gives TikTok

475
00:27:37,520 --> 00:27:40,800
Speaker 3: a reprieve. What does it mean? I'm June Gross. When

476
00:27:40,800 --> 00:27:46,040
Speaker 3: you're listening to Bloomberg. President Donald Trump temporarily halted the

477
00:27:46,080 --> 00:27:49,600
Speaker 3: ban on TikTok in the US, granting the company and

478
00:27:49,640 --> 00:27:53,640
Speaker 3: its Chinese parent, Byte Dance, a seventy five day reprieve

479
00:27:54,119 --> 00:27:56,520
Speaker 3: to reach a deal for the popular app that would

480
00:27:56,560 --> 00:28:02,200
Speaker 3: resolve national security concerns. TikTok Lifeline came in an executive

481
00:28:02,359 --> 00:28:05,119
Speaker 3: order signed by Trump on Monday, in one of his

482
00:28:05,280 --> 00:28:09,520
Speaker 3: first acts after taking office. His stance is that American

483
00:28:09,600 --> 00:28:13,159
Speaker 3: company should own half of the wildly popular app.

484
00:28:13,880 --> 00:28:16,240
Speaker 6: The US should be entitled to get half of TikTok,

485
00:28:17,320 --> 00:28:22,000
Speaker 6: and congratulations, TikTok has a good partner, and that would

486
00:28:22,080 --> 00:28:25,320
Speaker 6: be worth you know, it could be five hundred billion

487
00:28:25,400 --> 00:28:28,679
Speaker 6: dollars or something. It's crazy, The numbers are crazy, but

488
00:28:28,760 --> 00:28:31,600
Speaker 6: it's worthless. If I don't if the President doesn't sign,

489
00:28:32,520 --> 00:28:33,440
Speaker 6: then it's worthless.

490
00:28:33,720 --> 00:28:36,760
Speaker 3: Joining me is first Amendment expert doctor Kirk McGill of

491
00:28:36,880 --> 00:28:41,280
Speaker 3: hall Estell. So tell us about Trump's order granting TikTok

492
00:28:41,400 --> 00:28:43,720
Speaker 3: this reprieve for seventy five days.

493
00:28:44,120 --> 00:28:46,600
Speaker 4: So the order is exactly what you just said. It

494
00:28:46,720 --> 00:28:49,880
Speaker 4: simply says, I, President Trump, with the authority I claim

495
00:28:49,960 --> 00:28:53,320
Speaker 4: under the law hereby extend for seventy five days the

496
00:28:53,360 --> 00:28:57,000
Speaker 4: band on TikTok. And I encourage all companies, for example

497
00:28:57,160 --> 00:28:59,760
Speaker 4: Google and Apple in their stores to allow TikTok to

498
00:28:59,760 --> 00:29:02,040
Speaker 4: get They need to operate during that period, and I

499
00:29:02,120 --> 00:29:03,880
Speaker 4: promise not to send you to jail if you do

500
00:29:03,920 --> 00:29:06,440
Speaker 4: that sign Donald Trump, does he have.

501
00:29:06,320 --> 00:29:09,920
Speaker 3: The authority to issue that kind of executive order because

502
00:29:10,360 --> 00:29:14,520
Speaker 3: according to the TikTok ban the law, an extension is

503
00:29:14,520 --> 00:29:18,000
Speaker 3: only possible if he can show Congress that there's a

504
00:29:18,120 --> 00:29:20,480
Speaker 3: viable path forward to make a deal.

505
00:29:21,120 --> 00:29:23,680
Speaker 4: Likely, he does not have the legal authority under the

506
00:29:23,720 --> 00:29:27,160
Speaker 4: statute strictly speaking. But the question is, is anybody going

507
00:29:27,200 --> 00:29:29,400
Speaker 4: to be able to do anything about it in those

508
00:29:29,440 --> 00:29:33,120
Speaker 4: seventy five days? Court system works rather slowly, so is

509
00:29:33,120 --> 00:29:35,960
Speaker 4: anyone going to have standing to go stop him from

510
00:29:36,000 --> 00:29:37,720
Speaker 4: doing that, that's going to be able to get a

511
00:29:37,800 --> 00:29:39,760
Speaker 4: judge to put a stop to it within that seventy

512
00:29:39,840 --> 00:29:42,640
Speaker 4: day five day period. Clearly he's betting that they are not.

513
00:29:43,560 --> 00:29:46,840
Speaker 3: So he sort of shrugged off the national security concerns

514
00:29:47,400 --> 00:29:50,680
Speaker 3: around TikTok, which was the ostensible reason for the ban,

515
00:29:51,280 --> 00:29:54,320
Speaker 3: saying the US has bigger problems than any threat of

516
00:29:54,400 --> 00:29:57,680
Speaker 3: China potentially getting information about young kids.

517
00:29:58,120 --> 00:30:01,120
Speaker 4: So Trump, of course, is plus playing a game here,

518
00:30:01,240 --> 00:30:04,400
Speaker 4: which is he's trying to get a deal done. He's

519
00:30:04,480 --> 00:30:07,880
Speaker 4: very open about saying that, and so he's trying to

520
00:30:07,960 --> 00:30:11,720
Speaker 4: deliver a message to China of I'm your friend, I'm

521
00:30:11,720 --> 00:30:13,600
Speaker 4: the good cop. I'm the one that could get a

522
00:30:13,640 --> 00:30:16,960
Speaker 4: deal done here, because the alternative is a US Congress

523
00:30:16,960 --> 00:30:20,440
Speaker 4: that voted overwhelmingly for banning you. And you couldn't get

524
00:30:20,480 --> 00:30:22,720
Speaker 4: that many members of Congress to agree on what day

525
00:30:22,720 --> 00:30:25,400
Speaker 4: of the week. It is much less on what constitutes

526
00:30:25,400 --> 00:30:27,680
Speaker 4: a national security threat. So the fact that they all

527
00:30:27,760 --> 00:30:31,200
Speaker 4: walked out of those classified briefings that voted overwhelmingly for

528
00:30:31,280 --> 00:30:34,400
Speaker 4: banning TikTok sets them up very much as the bad

529
00:30:34,480 --> 00:30:37,360
Speaker 4: cop in this deal making. And so Trump seems to

530
00:30:37,400 --> 00:30:40,280
Speaker 4: be brushing off those national security implications not because he

531
00:30:40,320 --> 00:30:43,760
Speaker 4: isn't aware of them and doesn't respect them, but rather

532
00:30:43,840 --> 00:30:45,960
Speaker 4: because he's trying to set himself up to be the

533
00:30:46,000 --> 00:30:48,040
Speaker 4: deal maker. And this is a man who's written an

534
00:30:48,160 --> 00:30:50,960
Speaker 4: entire book about half he tries to make deals. This

535
00:30:51,080 --> 00:30:53,480
Speaker 4: is pretty much par for how he tries to make deals.

536
00:30:53,520 --> 00:30:55,680
Speaker 4: He's either the good cop or the bad cop, and

537
00:30:55,720 --> 00:30:58,080
Speaker 4: he set himself up in this one to be either one.

538
00:30:58,280 --> 00:31:00,880
Speaker 4: He's certainly cautioned China that he's aware of the national

539
00:31:00,920 --> 00:31:04,320
Speaker 4: security implication and that any deal that gets done is

540
00:31:04,360 --> 00:31:06,520
Speaker 4: going to have to protect the Americans. So he set

541
00:31:06,600 --> 00:31:08,800
Speaker 4: himself up to be able to play whichever side he

542
00:31:08,920 --> 00:31:11,520
Speaker 4: needs to in order to get a deal done, assuming

543
00:31:11,520 --> 00:31:12,560
Speaker 4: there's one to be had.

544
00:31:12,880 --> 00:31:15,160
Speaker 3: He said, I could see a deal where the US

545
00:31:15,240 --> 00:31:17,920
Speaker 3: gets fifty percent of TikTok police. Is it a little

546
00:31:17,920 --> 00:31:21,080
Speaker 3: bit or a lot, depends on them. Do you see

547
00:31:21,120 --> 00:31:22,760
Speaker 3: a deal like that anywhere?

548
00:31:24,080 --> 00:31:25,560
Speaker 4: I don't think I see a deal in which the

549
00:31:25,640 --> 00:31:28,880
Speaker 4: United States government is going to own a major institution

550
00:31:29,760 --> 00:31:33,200
Speaker 4: of public communication that simply has so many First Amendment

551
00:31:33,280 --> 00:31:36,200
Speaker 4: implications that the lawyers at the Justice Department will probably

552
00:31:36,240 --> 00:31:38,360
Speaker 4: all walk out and start having a group cry in

553
00:31:38,360 --> 00:31:41,120
Speaker 4: the parking lot. If he actually was serious about doing that.

554
00:31:41,400 --> 00:31:43,600
Speaker 4: I don't think he's serious about doing it now. Trying

555
00:31:43,640 --> 00:31:45,840
Speaker 4: to predict what Donald Trump is going to do, let's

556
00:31:45,840 --> 00:31:50,160
Speaker 4: all admit, is an exercise in guessing at best. But

557
00:31:50,200 --> 00:31:52,320
Speaker 4: if I had to guess, I would say that's simply

558
00:31:52,360 --> 00:31:54,920
Speaker 4: all part of his game. Ultimately, what he wants is

559
00:31:54,960 --> 00:31:56,640
Speaker 4: he wants to have his cake and eat it too.

560
00:31:57,040 --> 00:31:59,760
Speaker 4: He wants TikTok to be able to survive in some form,

561
00:32:00,000 --> 00:32:01,880
Speaker 4: as it would get him a large amount of political

562
00:32:01,920 --> 00:32:04,960
Speaker 4: support from all of the TikTok users who say yay,

563
00:32:05,040 --> 00:32:07,880
Speaker 4: Donald Trump, save TikTok. At the same time, he's not

564
00:32:07,920 --> 00:32:11,160
Speaker 4: a fool. He's got national security people talking about to

565
00:32:11,280 --> 00:32:14,160
Speaker 4: him to explain just how dangerous TikTok is and its

566
00:32:14,160 --> 00:32:17,720
Speaker 4: information collection could be to America in the future, particularly

567
00:32:17,720 --> 00:32:21,200
Speaker 4: with people who aren't necessarily aware of what they're giving up, teenagers,

568
00:32:21,800 --> 00:32:24,840
Speaker 4: people that aren't even on TikTok, but whose information is

569
00:32:24,880 --> 00:32:28,080
Speaker 4: being provided to TikTok through, for example, access to the

570
00:32:28,120 --> 00:32:31,080
Speaker 4: phone book of people who are on TikTok, and the

571
00:32:31,200 --> 00:32:34,000
Speaker 4: kind of danger that composed in the future to the

572
00:32:34,080 --> 00:32:37,080
Speaker 4: United States, to our national security. So he's trying to

573
00:32:37,160 --> 00:32:40,400
Speaker 4: balance those things out, and ultimately the only way to

574
00:32:40,480 --> 00:32:42,959
Speaker 4: do that is to not have China own TikTok, and

575
00:32:43,000 --> 00:32:47,000
Speaker 4: that's what Congress decided, That's what the courts have ultimately upheld,

576
00:32:47,520 --> 00:32:49,880
Speaker 4: and that is certainly what his national security experts are

577
00:32:49,920 --> 00:32:52,560
Speaker 4: going to be telling him. What he's trying to find

578
00:32:52,560 --> 00:32:54,280
Speaker 4: out is can I have that cake and eat it too?

579
00:32:54,320 --> 00:32:57,080
Speaker 4: Can I keep TikTok in one piece and functional in

580
00:32:57,080 --> 00:32:59,240
Speaker 4: the United States, but do so in a way that

581
00:32:59,280 --> 00:33:01,160
Speaker 4: takes it out of it for all of China. China

582
00:33:01,160 --> 00:33:03,520
Speaker 4: obviously doesn't want to let him do that, so he's

583
00:33:03,560 --> 00:33:05,840
Speaker 4: playing a game of brinksmanship with them, and that's why

584
00:33:05,880 --> 00:33:08,400
Speaker 4: we're seeing things like, for example, him coming out and saying,

585
00:33:08,400 --> 00:33:11,120
Speaker 4: maybe he'll put a one hundred percent tariff on China's

586
00:33:11,160 --> 00:33:13,600
Speaker 4: goods if the deal isn't being made. That's all the

587
00:33:13,680 --> 00:33:16,680
Speaker 4: kind of brinksmanship that Trump loves and in many cases

588
00:33:16,680 --> 00:33:19,760
Speaker 4: has been successful at in forcing other countries to come

589
00:33:19,800 --> 00:33:22,040
Speaker 4: to the bargaining table. Whether he's going to be successful

590
00:33:22,040 --> 00:33:23,960
Speaker 4: here or not, that remains to be seen.

591
00:33:24,280 --> 00:33:27,440
Speaker 3: Let me ask you this about the security threat. Is

592
00:33:27,440 --> 00:33:31,880
Speaker 3: it just a prospective threat. There's been no public information

593
00:33:31,960 --> 00:33:36,080
Speaker 3: that they've accessed to anyone's data or engaged in any

594
00:33:36,120 --> 00:33:39,680
Speaker 3: propaganda on TikTok? Is there is it a concern about

595
00:33:39,880 --> 00:33:40,560
Speaker 3: what might.

596
00:33:40,440 --> 00:33:45,560
Speaker 4: Happen in the publicly available information. It is primarily about

597
00:33:45,600 --> 00:33:49,200
Speaker 4: what could theoretically be done by China as opposed to

598
00:33:49,280 --> 00:33:52,120
Speaker 4: what has been done. But we know there's this large

599
00:33:52,200 --> 00:33:57,160
Speaker 4: trough of classify informations not publicly available that Congress had

600
00:33:57,200 --> 00:34:00,200
Speaker 4: access to, but that no one else has had access to.

601
00:34:00,640 --> 00:34:02,840
Speaker 4: The theory, and this, of course is just a theory,

602
00:34:03,040 --> 00:34:06,920
Speaker 4: is that anything about actual use of that information would

603
00:34:06,920 --> 00:34:09,359
Speaker 4: be in that classified file because it could give away

604
00:34:09,360 --> 00:34:11,839
Speaker 4: our sources and methods. In other words, if we say, hey,

605
00:34:11,920 --> 00:34:15,680
Speaker 4: we know that China used this information because in this meeting,

606
00:34:15,760 --> 00:34:19,480
Speaker 4: on this date, these Chinese officials did that, well, by definition,

607
00:34:19,520 --> 00:34:23,279
Speaker 4: we're giving away our methods, or at least risking our

608
00:34:23,360 --> 00:34:26,239
Speaker 4: methods of how did we get that information. Did we

609
00:34:26,360 --> 00:34:29,839
Speaker 4: breach them electronically, did we have an agent in the room,

610
00:34:30,320 --> 00:34:32,759
Speaker 4: How did we get that information? And so that's not

611
00:34:32,920 --> 00:34:35,120
Speaker 4: the kind of thing the United States government would want

612
00:34:35,200 --> 00:34:37,759
Speaker 4: to be publicly known. I think we have to rely

613
00:34:37,840 --> 00:34:40,080
Speaker 4: on the fact again that Congress came out of those

614
00:34:40,160 --> 00:34:43,640
Speaker 4: meetings with sufficient concern to vote so overwhelmingly for the ban.

615
00:34:44,160 --> 00:34:47,000
Speaker 4: That would suggest that whatever they saw it posed a

616
00:34:47,040 --> 00:34:49,480
Speaker 4: sufficient danger to the United States that they were able

617
00:34:49,560 --> 00:34:51,920
Speaker 4: to come to it to an overwhelming agreement on the

618
00:34:51,960 --> 00:34:55,160
Speaker 4: TikTok law, when again, those same individuals could degree on

619
00:34:55,200 --> 00:34:57,240
Speaker 4: almost anything else in the universe right now.

620
00:34:57,840 --> 00:35:03,120
Speaker 3: Bite Dance has previously that it has no intention of divesting.

621
00:35:03,560 --> 00:35:05,840
Speaker 3: I mean, do you see any movement there?

622
00:35:06,560 --> 00:35:09,600
Speaker 4: I think Trump's plan, and again I'm guessing on a

623
00:35:09,640 --> 00:35:11,839
Speaker 4: man who likes to not make it easy to guess

624
00:35:11,840 --> 00:35:14,400
Speaker 4: what he's doing. That's part of his negotiation strategy. But

625
00:35:14,440 --> 00:35:17,799
Speaker 4: I'm guessing that this is the plan. China doesn't want

626
00:35:17,800 --> 00:35:21,279
Speaker 4: to divest TikTok. Trump's betting, however, if the choice is

627
00:35:21,320 --> 00:35:25,040
Speaker 4: between not having TikTok and any money associated with it

628
00:35:25,080 --> 00:35:27,799
Speaker 4: at all, having it be simply something you spent a

629
00:35:27,800 --> 00:35:29,680
Speaker 4: bunch of money on and now you can't use in

630
00:35:30,160 --> 00:35:33,480
Speaker 4: relation to your biggest competitor, or selling it to the

631
00:35:33,560 --> 00:35:36,400
Speaker 4: United States, they'll sell. So if he's able to put

632
00:35:36,440 --> 00:35:39,000
Speaker 4: his foot down and say, your choices China are not

633
00:35:39,239 --> 00:35:42,839
Speaker 4: operating TikTok under the control of China. Your choices are,

634
00:35:42,920 --> 00:35:46,719
Speaker 4: we'll pay you fair value for that, and you can

635
00:35:47,120 --> 00:35:50,160
Speaker 4: let us operate it, so you lose the spying aspect,

636
00:35:50,200 --> 00:35:52,000
Speaker 4: but you at least make some money off of it,

637
00:35:52,400 --> 00:35:54,959
Speaker 4: or will shut you down completely in accordance with the law,

638
00:35:54,960 --> 00:35:57,080
Speaker 4: in which case, not only will you not get your spine,

639
00:35:57,160 --> 00:35:59,560
Speaker 4: but you also won't get any money. And you've sunk

640
00:35:59,600 --> 00:36:02,200
Speaker 4: a huge amount of money into TikTok and you're just

641
00:36:02,239 --> 00:36:04,520
Speaker 4: going to eat that. And that seems to be the

642
00:36:04,560 --> 00:36:06,520
Speaker 4: game that he's playing with him is he's betting if

643
00:36:06,520 --> 00:36:09,759
Speaker 4: the choices between money and no money, that the issue

644
00:36:09,800 --> 00:36:11,560
Speaker 4: of whether they operate or not is off the table.

645
00:36:11,600 --> 00:36:13,960
Speaker 4: They're not going to be allowed to operate or Chinese control,

646
00:36:14,280 --> 00:36:16,840
Speaker 4: that the Chinese will take the money and run. And

647
00:36:16,880 --> 00:36:18,680
Speaker 4: whether or not that's true or not, we'll see, but

648
00:36:18,719 --> 00:36:21,839
Speaker 4: it's at least a rational move to be making on

649
00:36:21,880 --> 00:36:23,680
Speaker 4: his part to back them into that corner.

650
00:36:24,239 --> 00:36:28,759
Speaker 3: One prospective ownership group led by billionaire real estate investor

651
00:36:28,800 --> 00:36:36,040
Speaker 3: Frank McCourt is proposing to buy TikTok without that recommendation algorithm.

652
00:36:36,400 --> 00:36:39,800
Speaker 3: Isn't that algorithm what makes TikTok so popular?

653
00:36:40,719 --> 00:36:44,000
Speaker 4: Arguably yes. The question is is could you take the

654
00:36:44,200 --> 00:36:47,360
Speaker 4: brand in essence and all of the current users of

655
00:36:47,480 --> 00:36:51,400
Speaker 4: TikTok and develop an algorithm that's sufficiently good that you

656
00:36:51,440 --> 00:36:54,400
Speaker 4: wouldn't go lose all of those users? The course seems

657
00:36:54,440 --> 00:36:57,080
Speaker 4: to be betting the answer is yes, that they would

658
00:36:57,080 --> 00:36:59,520
Speaker 4: be able to do that. The key it seems to

659
00:36:59,520 --> 00:37:01,120
Speaker 4: be of that deal is is if I have a

660
00:37:01,120 --> 00:37:03,440
Speaker 4: cactive audience, I have those one hundred and seventy million

661
00:37:03,440 --> 00:37:06,640
Speaker 4: Americans that are using TikTok, how many of those are

662
00:37:06,640 --> 00:37:09,480
Speaker 4: going to go jump ship just because the algorithm may

663
00:37:09,480 --> 00:37:11,520
Speaker 4: not be as good as the one that it's replacing.

664
00:37:11,520 --> 00:37:14,320
Speaker 4: And he's betting not enough to make it not worth

665
00:37:14,360 --> 00:37:15,279
Speaker 4: what he's willing.

666
00:37:15,040 --> 00:37:18,080
Speaker 3: To pay for so, despite Trump's talking about this fifty

667
00:37:18,120 --> 00:37:22,440
Speaker 3: to fifty deal, House Speaker Mike Johnson said on Sunday

668
00:37:22,480 --> 00:37:25,720
Speaker 3: that there must be full divestiture from the Chinese Communist Party.

669
00:37:26,080 --> 00:37:29,280
Speaker 3: Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Tom Cotton said in a post

670
00:37:29,320 --> 00:37:32,080
Speaker 3: on x there was no legal basis for any kind

671
00:37:32,120 --> 00:37:35,000
Speaker 3: of extension. But do you think that Trump can get

672
00:37:35,120 --> 00:37:37,960
Speaker 3: Congress this Congress to do what he wants.

673
00:37:38,520 --> 00:37:40,120
Speaker 4: I don't think he's going to have a lot of

674
00:37:40,200 --> 00:37:43,319
Speaker 4: success in getting Congress to back off on the divestioner

675
00:37:43,400 --> 00:37:46,160
Speaker 4: because that's the whole point. Keeping the Chinese government out

676
00:37:46,160 --> 00:37:48,960
Speaker 4: of TikTok is the point of the statue. Either the

677
00:37:49,080 --> 00:37:53,040
Speaker 4: vest or be banned, and there's such overwhelming support for that.

678
00:37:53,120 --> 00:37:56,239
Speaker 4: Does Trump really want to burn his capital with Congress

679
00:37:56,280 --> 00:37:59,800
Speaker 4: on that issue. The problem, to some extent is Trump

680
00:37:59,840 --> 00:38:02,760
Speaker 4: has took himself in a corner. I think quite knowingly

681
00:38:02,840 --> 00:38:06,600
Speaker 4: he's taken on the risk. But if he had done nothing,

682
00:38:06,960 --> 00:38:09,160
Speaker 4: then one hundred percent of the blame could rightly have

683
00:38:09,200 --> 00:38:11,960
Speaker 4: been put on Congress and on President by President Biden

684
00:38:12,040 --> 00:38:15,640
Speaker 4: unquestionably had the statutory authority to extend the time they

685
00:38:15,640 --> 00:38:18,319
Speaker 4: had before the band kicked in, he chose not to

686
00:38:18,400 --> 00:38:21,920
Speaker 4: do that. Congress of course passed the original law. So

687
00:38:22,040 --> 00:38:26,279
Speaker 4: Trump really had no responsibility for TikTok up until Sunday night.

688
00:38:26,719 --> 00:38:28,680
Speaker 4: But as soon as he came in and said, I'm

689
00:38:28,719 --> 00:38:31,719
Speaker 4: now extending this time, I'm going to go stay TikTok,

690
00:38:31,760 --> 00:38:33,719
Speaker 4: and not just doing that on the campaign trail, but

691
00:38:33,800 --> 00:38:37,680
Speaker 4: doing it as president in an executive order. If TikTok

692
00:38:37,760 --> 00:38:40,359
Speaker 4: now goes dark because Trump isn't able to get a

693
00:38:40,360 --> 00:38:43,720
Speaker 4: deal done, then TikTok when you try to log into TikTok,

694
00:38:43,760 --> 00:38:45,680
Speaker 4: it's not going to say what it says right now,

695
00:38:45,719 --> 00:38:48,239
Speaker 4: which is We've been saved by Donald Trump. It's going

696
00:38:48,320 --> 00:38:50,840
Speaker 4: to say this is all Donald Trump's fault. So the

697
00:38:50,920 --> 00:38:53,719
Speaker 4: Chinese government is unquestionably aware of the fact that they

698
00:38:53,760 --> 00:38:55,880
Speaker 4: have that leverage. And if I was giving advice to

699
00:38:55,920 --> 00:38:58,560
Speaker 4: the Chinese government rather than Donald Trump, I'd be telling

700
00:38:58,600 --> 00:39:01,080
Speaker 4: him to use that. He's just put himself in the

701
00:39:01,120 --> 00:39:04,680
Speaker 4: crosshairs of one hundred and seventy million American TikTok users.

702
00:39:04,640 --> 00:39:05,320
Speaker 1: Make him eating.

703
00:39:05,560 --> 00:39:08,160
Speaker 4: And again, Trump's not a fool. He knows he's put

704
00:39:08,239 --> 00:39:10,400
Speaker 4: himself in that position, and he seems to be betting

705
00:39:10,400 --> 00:39:11,799
Speaker 4: that he's going to be able to get a deal

706
00:39:11,840 --> 00:39:15,360
Speaker 4: done as satisfy factory to everybody. If he does that,

707
00:39:15,480 --> 00:39:17,799
Speaker 4: I think he's going to reap the political reward of that.

708
00:39:18,160 --> 00:39:20,160
Speaker 4: If he doesn't do that, he's going to reach the

709
00:39:20,160 --> 00:39:22,520
Speaker 4: political consequences. Either he's going to have to go try

710
00:39:22,560 --> 00:39:24,920
Speaker 4: to get Congress to back off on something that Congress

711
00:39:24,960 --> 00:39:28,520
Speaker 4: feels very strongly about from a national security perspective, which

712
00:39:28,560 --> 00:39:31,840
Speaker 4: burns his political capital with Congress, or he's going to

713
00:39:31,880 --> 00:39:34,600
Speaker 4: go have to tick off a bunch of TikTok users

714
00:39:34,640 --> 00:39:38,879
Speaker 4: unintended around the country. And so he's playing a very

715
00:39:38,960 --> 00:39:40,960
Speaker 4: high stakes game of chicken. That this is a man

716
00:39:41,000 --> 00:39:43,479
Speaker 4: who's made his entire career out of playing a high

717
00:39:43,480 --> 00:39:46,080
Speaker 4: stakes game of chicken. Donald Trump doesn't believe in the

718
00:39:46,160 --> 00:39:50,320
Speaker 4: no win scenario. He believed in the immovable object against

719
00:39:50,320 --> 00:39:53,160
Speaker 4: the unstoppable force. That in fact, something's got to give

720
00:39:53,160 --> 00:39:55,480
Speaker 4: and it's not going to be him, And whether or

721
00:39:55,520 --> 00:39:57,719
Speaker 4: not he can pull that off in this case, I

722
00:39:57,800 --> 00:39:59,759
Speaker 4: have him a clue. And anybody who says that they

723
00:39:59,800 --> 00:40:04,560
Speaker 4: do either is lying or has gotten personal assurances from

724
00:40:04,600 --> 00:40:07,480
Speaker 4: a higher power on what's going to happen. Because I

725
00:40:07,520 --> 00:40:09,800
Speaker 4: couldn't put odds on this of how it's going to

726
00:40:09,880 --> 00:40:11,440
Speaker 4: come out. I can tell you it's going to be

727
00:40:11,440 --> 00:40:13,480
Speaker 4: interesting to watch, and I can tell you that we've

728
00:40:13,520 --> 00:40:17,640
Speaker 4: got two very motivated powers in Trump for the United

729
00:40:17,680 --> 00:40:20,400
Speaker 4: States and China to both have a lot at stake

730
00:40:20,440 --> 00:40:22,919
Speaker 4: at this issue and want to see this work out

731
00:40:22,920 --> 00:40:26,120
Speaker 4: in a particular way. The difference is the Chinese Communist

732
00:40:26,120 --> 00:40:29,879
Speaker 4: Party ultimately is looking for an outcome that's acceptable to them,

733
00:40:30,280 --> 00:40:33,320
Speaker 4: whereas Trump has to deal with the democratic forces of

734
00:40:33,360 --> 00:40:36,439
Speaker 4: our country, public opinion, Congress. There are a lot more

735
00:40:36,520 --> 00:40:39,880
Speaker 4: moving parts for him than there are in China.

736
00:40:39,200 --> 00:40:43,000
Speaker 3: And seventy five days goes by pretty quickly. Thanks so

737
00:40:43,080 --> 00:40:45,880
Speaker 3: much for being on the show. That's doctor Kirk McGill

738
00:40:46,000 --> 00:40:48,680
Speaker 3: of hall Estel and that's it for this edition of

739
00:40:48,680 --> 00:40:51,360
Speaker 3: The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get the

740
00:40:51,400 --> 00:40:54,640
Speaker 3: latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can

741
00:40:54,640 --> 00:40:58,879
Speaker 3: find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www dot

742
00:40:58,920 --> 00:41:03,080
Speaker 3: Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law, and remember to

743
00:41:03,120 --> 00:41:06,200
Speaker 3: tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at ten

744
00:41:06,239 --> 00:41:10,000
Speaker 3: pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso, and you're listening

745
00:41:10,120 --> 00:41:10,719
Speaker 3: to Bloomberg