1 00:00:03,200 --> 00:00:07,960 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio 2 00:00:09,360 --> 00:00:12,200 Speaker 1: w n B. A star Brittany Grinder has been detained 3 00:00:12,200 --> 00:00:16,079 Speaker 1: in Russia for weeks after authorities say they found vape 4 00:00:16,120 --> 00:00:19,960 Speaker 1: cartridges containing cannabis oil in her luggage during a search 5 00:00:20,000 --> 00:00:23,000 Speaker 1: at an airport near Moscow. The White House has not 6 00:00:23,160 --> 00:00:28,640 Speaker 1: given any specifics about Grinder's case. Here's Press Secretary Jen Saki. 7 00:00:28,720 --> 00:00:32,080 Speaker 1: Of course, we obviously do everything we can uh when 8 00:00:32,120 --> 00:00:35,000 Speaker 1: there are any reports of Americans who are detained through 9 00:00:35,040 --> 00:00:39,480 Speaker 1: the state's department through diplomatic channels. However, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, 10 00:00:39,560 --> 00:00:44,120 Speaker 1: who represents the district where Grinder is from, has expressed concerns. 11 00:00:44,720 --> 00:00:47,720 Speaker 1: We know that we have to move on her situation. 12 00:00:48,200 --> 00:00:51,879 Speaker 1: She is in a circumstance that would generate a ten 13 00:00:51,960 --> 00:00:56,120 Speaker 1: year sentence. Many of us believe that this is unwarranted. 14 00:00:56,720 --> 00:00:59,080 Speaker 1: Joining me is Jeffrey Kahn, a professor at s m 15 00:00:59,160 --> 00:01:03,600 Speaker 1: U Law School. Let's start by discussing the Russian legal 16 00:01:03,640 --> 00:01:07,560 Speaker 1: system compared to the American system. Is it like night 17 00:01:07,600 --> 00:01:10,520 Speaker 1: and day? I wouldn't say it's like night and day anymore, 18 00:01:10,560 --> 00:01:14,479 Speaker 1: but there are some really substantial differences. We are familiar 19 00:01:14,840 --> 00:01:18,360 Speaker 1: because it's so prominent in our history and culture. With 20 00:01:18,440 --> 00:01:21,240 Speaker 1: the American conception of criminal justice, you could call this 21 00:01:21,319 --> 00:01:25,880 Speaker 1: an adversarial system. The idea is that each side presents 22 00:01:25,959 --> 00:01:30,440 Speaker 1: its version of the truth by conducting its own independent investigations, 23 00:01:30,480 --> 00:01:35,399 Speaker 1: gathering its own witnesses, with a variety of procedural protections, 24 00:01:35,760 --> 00:01:40,080 Speaker 1: especially for the defense. But nothing really counts as evidence 25 00:01:40,240 --> 00:01:43,440 Speaker 1: unless it's been presented at trial, and so the trial 26 00:01:43,640 --> 00:01:47,480 Speaker 1: is the focus of our criminal justice system. It's a 27 00:01:47,560 --> 00:01:51,440 Speaker 1: very dramatic event, and that's probably why we have so 28 00:01:51,520 --> 00:01:56,720 Speaker 1: many American movies that center on trials. The Russian approach 29 00:01:56,840 --> 00:02:00,280 Speaker 1: is much more influenced by the continental European coach to 30 00:02:00,360 --> 00:02:03,200 Speaker 1: criminal justice. You're just not going to see the same 31 00:02:03,240 --> 00:02:06,880 Speaker 1: sort of movies in Russia that focus on the trial. 32 00:02:07,040 --> 00:02:11,639 Speaker 1: And that's because there's a different fundamental concept at the 33 00:02:11,680 --> 00:02:14,400 Speaker 1: base of that criminal justice system, and that is that 34 00:02:14,800 --> 00:02:18,600 Speaker 1: the search for objective truth is too important to leave 35 00:02:19,040 --> 00:02:23,519 Speaker 1: to either of the parties. These are biased sources by definition, 36 00:02:23,520 --> 00:02:26,120 Speaker 1: and so the state has to be in control of 37 00:02:26,160 --> 00:02:29,079 Speaker 1: the search for truth, and that means the state has 38 00:02:29,160 --> 00:02:33,720 Speaker 1: a special official called the investigator, the sled of Vattal 39 00:02:34,160 --> 00:02:39,160 Speaker 1: who will conduct a pre trial investigation to gather exculpatory 40 00:02:39,160 --> 00:02:43,120 Speaker 1: and inculpatory information to be used by both sides, the 41 00:02:43,200 --> 00:02:47,600 Speaker 1: prosecutor and the defense. And with this assumption in mind, 42 00:02:47,680 --> 00:02:51,160 Speaker 1: then the trial, at least in the classic conception of 43 00:02:51,200 --> 00:02:55,160 Speaker 1: an inquisitorial system, is really a verification to make sure 44 00:02:55,200 --> 00:02:58,160 Speaker 1: that the investigator has done a proper job, followed all 45 00:02:58,200 --> 00:03:01,840 Speaker 1: the procedures, and that the evidence that has been collected 46 00:03:01,840 --> 00:03:05,960 Speaker 1: in what's called a case file has been verified. That 47 00:03:06,000 --> 00:03:09,280 Speaker 1: means that a continental European trial is a much duller 48 00:03:09,320 --> 00:03:13,160 Speaker 1: affair than the sensational drama of a Perry Mason moment 49 00:03:13,240 --> 00:03:18,079 Speaker 1: in an American adversarial proceeding. Now, the Russian system has 50 00:03:18,120 --> 00:03:20,920 Speaker 1: been changed a little bit. After the collapse of the 51 00:03:20,960 --> 00:03:24,880 Speaker 1: Soviet Union, a new constitution was established, and that constitution 52 00:03:24,919 --> 00:03:29,560 Speaker 1: provided an article one twenty three that judicial proceedings shall 53 00:03:29,600 --> 00:03:32,800 Speaker 1: be conducted on the basis of adversarial principles and the 54 00:03:32,880 --> 00:03:36,120 Speaker 1: equality of the parties concerned. And, with the help of 55 00:03:36,360 --> 00:03:41,440 Speaker 1: American officials from the Justice Department and elsewhere advising Russians 56 00:03:41,480 --> 00:03:44,800 Speaker 1: on the creation of their new criminal justice system, a 57 00:03:44,920 --> 00:03:49,920 Speaker 1: lot of adversarial principles were added to that system. The 58 00:03:49,920 --> 00:03:54,040 Speaker 1: thing is the case file was never taken out, and 59 00:03:54,080 --> 00:03:59,000 Speaker 1: it's very hard for adversarial principles to connect in a 60 00:03:59,080 --> 00:04:01,680 Speaker 1: system that still has a case file, and so there's 61 00:04:01,720 --> 00:04:05,160 Speaker 1: a clash there. And the case file, I would say, 62 00:04:05,320 --> 00:04:08,400 Speaker 1: is still king. If it's not in the case file, 63 00:04:08,600 --> 00:04:11,560 Speaker 1: it doesn't exist in the world. I know in Japan 64 00:04:11,720 --> 00:04:16,839 Speaker 1: the prosecution wins in something like cases. Is it similar 65 00:04:16,880 --> 00:04:20,719 Speaker 1: in Russia? What's the rate of the prosecution winning. I 66 00:04:20,760 --> 00:04:23,159 Speaker 1: don't know a specific rate to give you, but I 67 00:04:23,200 --> 00:04:27,320 Speaker 1: will say that acquittals are very, very unusual. And also 68 00:04:27,560 --> 00:04:32,159 Speaker 1: although there are other aspects of adversarial principles involved in 69 00:04:32,200 --> 00:04:35,600 Speaker 1: the Russian criminal justice system. For instance, juries have been 70 00:04:35,640 --> 00:04:40,000 Speaker 1: reintroduced into Russia, they are not found in very many 71 00:04:40,080 --> 00:04:44,640 Speaker 1: particular cases. That's limited by federal law. Which types of 72 00:04:44,680 --> 00:04:48,120 Speaker 1: crimes qualify for juries, and not very many of them do. 73 00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:51,640 Speaker 1: And so that means that once you get to trial, 74 00:04:52,200 --> 00:04:55,520 Speaker 1: it can almost be too late. The savvy defense attorney 75 00:04:55,560 --> 00:04:57,360 Speaker 1: is going to work hard to make sure that the 76 00:04:57,440 --> 00:05:01,440 Speaker 1: case file presents all the information that needs to be presented, 77 00:05:01,839 --> 00:05:05,760 Speaker 1: and that information that is damaging to the defendant or 78 00:05:05,839 --> 00:05:09,240 Speaker 1: has been collected in an improper way is excluded from 79 00:05:09,279 --> 00:05:11,960 Speaker 1: the case file. But there's a heavy thumb on the 80 00:05:12,040 --> 00:05:16,000 Speaker 1: scales of justice that is placed there by the state, 81 00:05:16,040 --> 00:05:18,159 Speaker 1: which is in control of the case file, And the 82 00:05:18,200 --> 00:05:21,800 Speaker 1: connection between the investigator and the prosecutor is a much 83 00:05:21,839 --> 00:05:25,159 Speaker 1: stronger one than the connection between the investigator and the 84 00:05:25,200 --> 00:05:29,679 Speaker 1: defense attorney. I've heard experts say that once someone gets 85 00:05:29,839 --> 00:05:34,360 Speaker 1: arrested in Russia, it's nearly impossible to get them out 86 00:05:34,440 --> 00:05:37,520 Speaker 1: from behind bars. I don't know that I have enough 87 00:05:37,600 --> 00:05:40,599 Speaker 1: data to affirm that conclusion, but I will say that 88 00:05:40,640 --> 00:05:44,000 Speaker 1: a lot of experts on the Russian criminal justice system 89 00:05:44,000 --> 00:05:46,839 Speaker 1: and the Russian legal system I have come to a 90 00:05:46,880 --> 00:05:50,400 Speaker 1: conclusion that Russia operates what you could call a dual state. 91 00:05:51,080 --> 00:05:54,200 Speaker 1: On the one hand, the criminal justice system and the 92 00:05:54,440 --> 00:05:59,960 Speaker 1: entire judicial system is staffed with very competent, well educated 93 00:06:00,160 --> 00:06:03,120 Speaker 1: professional men and women in the form of judges and 94 00:06:03,200 --> 00:06:06,920 Speaker 1: prosecutors and defense attorneys and investigators. And the system has 95 00:06:06,960 --> 00:06:10,720 Speaker 1: gotten much much better to the point where it can 96 00:06:10,760 --> 00:06:15,839 Speaker 1: perform professionally, efficiently and even fairly in the mind run 97 00:06:15,880 --> 00:06:19,080 Speaker 1: of cases, ordinary cases of no concern to the state. 98 00:06:19,760 --> 00:06:23,120 Speaker 1: But when the state takes an interest in a particular 99 00:06:23,240 --> 00:06:28,599 Speaker 1: case or in a more corrupt manner, individual oligarchs or 100 00:06:28,680 --> 00:06:32,520 Speaker 1: people with power taken interest in a particular case, that 101 00:06:32,600 --> 00:06:36,359 Speaker 1: case can metaphorically move over to a political side of 102 00:06:36,440 --> 00:06:39,760 Speaker 1: the docket, where it's very, very difficult to get a 103 00:06:39,839 --> 00:06:43,320 Speaker 1: result that's solely based on law. There is much more 104 00:06:43,400 --> 00:06:48,560 Speaker 1: concern for political influence in particular cases when the state 105 00:06:48,920 --> 00:06:52,080 Speaker 1: or people of power in that system have an interest 106 00:06:52,120 --> 00:06:54,839 Speaker 1: in those cases. We sometimes take for granted in the 107 00:06:54,920 --> 00:06:58,040 Speaker 1: United States just how fortunate we are to have a 108 00:06:58,080 --> 00:07:02,039 Speaker 1: federal judicial system and in most state state judicial systems 109 00:07:02,080 --> 00:07:05,000 Speaker 1: that are nearly incorruptible, so we don't have to worry 110 00:07:05,000 --> 00:07:08,080 Speaker 1: about that dual state problem. But it is a problem 111 00:07:08,120 --> 00:07:12,880 Speaker 1: in the Russian Federation. So that brings up Grinder, the 112 00:07:13,000 --> 00:07:17,040 Speaker 1: timing of her arrest during the Ukraine conflict and the 113 00:07:17,200 --> 00:07:22,440 Speaker 1: implications advocates and lawmakers fear that she's going to be 114 00:07:22,640 --> 00:07:25,400 Speaker 1: used as a pawn by Russian will in essence be 115 00:07:25,680 --> 00:07:30,280 Speaker 1: a political prisoner. Well, I only know what's been reported 116 00:07:30,280 --> 00:07:33,160 Speaker 1: in the popular press about Ms Grinder's case. We do 117 00:07:33,240 --> 00:07:36,080 Speaker 1: know that she was arrested at an airport in Russia 118 00:07:36,320 --> 00:07:40,080 Speaker 1: in mid February, and she was accused under Article two 119 00:07:40,080 --> 00:07:44,560 Speaker 1: Tune nine one two of the Russian Criminal Code of 120 00:07:44,680 --> 00:07:49,280 Speaker 1: smuggling an unlawful substance into the Russian Federation in the 121 00:07:49,360 --> 00:07:52,600 Speaker 1: form of, as it's been reported, hashish oil for a 122 00:07:52,680 --> 00:07:56,560 Speaker 1: vape pen. Now, the particular provision under which she has 123 00:07:56,600 --> 00:08:01,360 Speaker 1: been accused suggests that she's alleged to have presented with 124 00:08:01,480 --> 00:08:05,880 Speaker 1: a significant amount of this material, and so the punishment 125 00:08:05,920 --> 00:08:10,120 Speaker 1: can range from five to ten years under the Russian Code. 126 00:08:10,720 --> 00:08:14,920 Speaker 1: Issue upawn in this well, I mean it's impossible to 127 00:08:14,960 --> 00:08:18,720 Speaker 1: stay on on this evidence. If we turned the case 128 00:08:18,800 --> 00:08:22,880 Speaker 1: around and a Russian citizen were to have flown into 129 00:08:22,880 --> 00:08:25,760 Speaker 1: New York City and been stopped by our Customs and 130 00:08:25,800 --> 00:08:30,560 Speaker 1: Border Protection officials and a sniffer dog alerted, as is 131 00:08:30,560 --> 00:08:34,160 Speaker 1: alleged to happen to Miss Grinder's case, and that person's 132 00:08:34,440 --> 00:08:37,839 Speaker 1: luggage was found to contain an unlawful substance, that person 133 00:08:37,880 --> 00:08:41,920 Speaker 1: would be charged with a crime processed through our criminal 134 00:08:41,960 --> 00:08:44,800 Speaker 1: justice system, just as Miss Grinder is being processed through 135 00:08:44,840 --> 00:08:48,600 Speaker 1: the Russian Federation system. So I really can't say whether 136 00:08:48,800 --> 00:08:51,280 Speaker 1: this is some sort of a set up, as some 137 00:08:51,440 --> 00:08:55,000 Speaker 1: defendants in the Russian criminal justice system have accused the 138 00:08:55,120 --> 00:08:58,560 Speaker 1: state of setting them up, or if this is simply 139 00:08:58,600 --> 00:09:01,040 Speaker 1: a case of someone come into the country and being 140 00:09:01,040 --> 00:09:03,640 Speaker 1: accused of a crime at a time when we are 141 00:09:03,720 --> 00:09:06,320 Speaker 1: at a high moment of political tension because of the 142 00:09:06,480 --> 00:09:11,240 Speaker 1: terrible events happening with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The 143 00:09:11,440 --> 00:09:15,640 Speaker 1: interesting point, however, is that because of the reputation of 144 00:09:15,760 --> 00:09:20,400 Speaker 1: our system of criminal justice, it would really be a 145 00:09:20,440 --> 00:09:25,040 Speaker 1: difficult point to prove or really to get most people 146 00:09:25,080 --> 00:09:28,360 Speaker 1: to believe that somehow a Russian citizen has been set 147 00:09:28,440 --> 00:09:32,800 Speaker 1: up by our system. But because of the history and 148 00:09:32,960 --> 00:09:36,560 Speaker 1: legacies of the of the Russian system, that's an accusation 149 00:09:36,679 --> 00:09:40,280 Speaker 1: that that gets a little more street credibility. She has 150 00:09:40,320 --> 00:09:42,839 Speaker 1: the right to an attorney, and she does have a 151 00:09:42,920 --> 00:09:46,559 Speaker 1: Russian attorney, and she has the right to contact the embassy. 152 00:09:46,640 --> 00:09:51,599 Speaker 1: But according to Congressman Colin all Read, the U. S 153 00:09:51,640 --> 00:09:54,560 Speaker 1: Embassy has requested to speak to her, and the request 154 00:09:54,600 --> 00:09:58,559 Speaker 1: hasn't been granted for three weeks. So do we already 155 00:09:58,720 --> 00:10:02,240 Speaker 1: see the US being limited in what it can do 156 00:10:02,280 --> 00:10:07,000 Speaker 1: in this situation. Well, she is entitled to a defense 157 00:10:07,040 --> 00:10:11,280 Speaker 1: attorney under Russian law, and she's entitled to a great 158 00:10:11,320 --> 00:10:15,720 Speaker 1: many procedural protections. Although that case file will always occupy 159 00:10:15,760 --> 00:10:20,000 Speaker 1: a central place in the proceedings. She should be, under 160 00:10:20,040 --> 00:10:24,360 Speaker 1: a variety of legal sources, including international law, entitled to 161 00:10:25,040 --> 00:10:29,520 Speaker 1: access to counselor authorities the United States Embassy. I don't 162 00:10:29,640 --> 00:10:33,320 Speaker 1: know why she should be denied that access, but it 163 00:10:33,400 --> 00:10:37,960 Speaker 1: certainly is very concerning and current events mean that any 164 00:10:38,000 --> 00:10:41,280 Speaker 1: involvement of an American citizen in the Russian criminal justice 165 00:10:41,320 --> 00:10:44,559 Speaker 1: system has the potential to be a much larger event 166 00:10:44,559 --> 00:10:47,120 Speaker 1: than the facts of his or her individual case. Do 167 00:10:47,160 --> 00:10:49,640 Speaker 1: we know what's happening now? Should we assume that the 168 00:10:49,720 --> 00:10:54,320 Speaker 1: Russian investigator is building the case against Grinder, and then 169 00:10:54,800 --> 00:10:57,280 Speaker 1: when he or she is done, we'll know what the 170 00:10:57,360 --> 00:11:02,480 Speaker 1: charges are. Yes, under the theory of an includatorial system, 171 00:11:02,520 --> 00:11:06,000 Speaker 1: it's not that the investigator is building the case against Grinder, 172 00:11:06,000 --> 00:11:08,959 Speaker 1: but the idea would be that the investigator is gathering 173 00:11:09,040 --> 00:11:12,520 Speaker 1: all of the evidence. Now. Under the Russian criminal Procedure Code, 174 00:11:12,520 --> 00:11:16,120 Speaker 1: a defense attorney now has the opportunity to do his 175 00:11:16,280 --> 00:11:19,360 Speaker 1: or her own direct investigation as well as to try 176 00:11:19,400 --> 00:11:23,439 Speaker 1: to be involved in immediate way in the investigator's work. 177 00:11:23,760 --> 00:11:27,520 Speaker 1: But yes, what's happening now is the development of the 178 00:11:27,559 --> 00:11:30,560 Speaker 1: case file, and there are time limits on that. The 179 00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:33,240 Speaker 1: initial time limit is two months, but that can be 180 00:11:33,280 --> 00:11:37,439 Speaker 1: extended by a court if the case proceeds slowly or 181 00:11:37,760 --> 00:11:41,600 Speaker 1: more time is needed. Likewise, that time limit is pretty 182 00:11:41,600 --> 00:11:45,839 Speaker 1: closely tied to the limits on pre trial detention. So 183 00:11:45,920 --> 00:11:49,400 Speaker 1: if Ms Grinder is in pre trial detention, now, the 184 00:11:49,440 --> 00:11:52,200 Speaker 1: next stage that has to be completed is the completion 185 00:11:52,240 --> 00:11:55,080 Speaker 1: of the case file. Is there a possibility of a 186 00:11:55,120 --> 00:11:57,920 Speaker 1: plea deal here as there is in the United States? 187 00:11:58,840 --> 00:12:01,640 Speaker 1: There are two off ramps I suppose you could call 188 00:12:01,720 --> 00:12:04,680 Speaker 1: them to this case. One is the equivalent of a 189 00:12:04,760 --> 00:12:07,160 Speaker 1: guilty plea. The term in Russia for this is a 190 00:12:07,200 --> 00:12:11,200 Speaker 1: special trial procedure is governed by Article three sixteen of 191 00:12:11,240 --> 00:12:14,640 Speaker 1: the Criminal Procedure Code. Taking this route would allow the 192 00:12:14,720 --> 00:12:17,960 Speaker 1: judge to enter a judgment of conviction and impost sentence 193 00:12:18,000 --> 00:12:21,160 Speaker 1: without a full blown trial. The sentence then could not 194 00:12:21,280 --> 00:12:24,360 Speaker 1: exceed two thirds of the highest punishment, so in Miss 195 00:12:24,400 --> 00:12:27,679 Speaker 1: Grinder's case the highest punishment being ten years, the guilty 196 00:12:27,679 --> 00:12:30,280 Speaker 1: plea would bring it down to slightly under seven years. 197 00:12:30,320 --> 00:12:33,000 Speaker 1: Another off ramp is the equivalent of a plea bargain, 198 00:12:33,240 --> 00:12:36,200 Speaker 1: although that term doesn't exist in the Russian Criminal Procedure Code. 199 00:12:36,200 --> 00:12:39,520 Speaker 1: Determined Russian for this would be a pre trial cooperation agreement, 200 00:12:39,840 --> 00:12:42,560 Speaker 1: but it's much closer to a plea bargain as we 201 00:12:42,720 --> 00:12:46,720 Speaker 1: understand it. So if during this investigative stage, when the 202 00:12:46,760 --> 00:12:50,439 Speaker 1: case file is being composed, MS Grinder with her attorney 203 00:12:50,760 --> 00:12:55,400 Speaker 1: should so request, then if she were to provide active 204 00:12:55,440 --> 00:13:00,160 Speaker 1: assistance to the investigation, if she were to expose is 205 00:13:00,360 --> 00:13:03,840 Speaker 1: alleged accomplices to the crime, for instance, to provide other 206 00:13:03,880 --> 00:13:08,000 Speaker 1: assistance that is described under the Criminal Procedure Code, and 207 00:13:08,240 --> 00:13:10,360 Speaker 1: if this was held by the court to have occurred 208 00:13:10,400 --> 00:13:13,880 Speaker 1: voluntarily and with the participation of the defense lawyer, then 209 00:13:13,920 --> 00:13:16,599 Speaker 1: the judge, at his or her discretion could sentence to 210 00:13:16,720 --> 00:13:20,560 Speaker 1: defend into a much milder sentence, including a suspended sense 211 00:13:20,960 --> 00:13:24,400 Speaker 1: or even release from serving the sense. So that is 212 00:13:24,440 --> 00:13:27,400 Speaker 1: a pretty significant off ramp, But all the cards are 213 00:13:27,440 --> 00:13:31,280 Speaker 1: really held by one side there, and it doesn't really 214 00:13:31,400 --> 00:13:35,520 Speaker 1: have the impact on the Russian criminal justice system that 215 00:13:35,679 --> 00:13:39,199 Speaker 1: our plea bargaining system has on ours. Our system simply 216 00:13:39,200 --> 00:13:42,679 Speaker 1: couldn't survive if we didn't have plea bargaining. It seems 217 00:13:42,720 --> 00:13:44,280 Speaker 1: as if you know, this is sort of like a 218 00:13:45,240 --> 00:13:49,960 Speaker 1: snowball rolling down a hill. If she is convicted and 219 00:13:50,040 --> 00:13:53,400 Speaker 1: given prison time, what happens. Is there any way for 220 00:13:53,520 --> 00:13:57,839 Speaker 1: the United States to get her out? I know that 221 00:13:57,880 --> 00:14:01,000 Speaker 1: there are at least two former reigns that are being 222 00:14:01,080 --> 00:14:05,560 Speaker 1: held in Russia. What can the United States do? But 223 00:14:05,640 --> 00:14:08,640 Speaker 1: as in any case when there is a criminal conviction, 224 00:14:08,679 --> 00:14:11,640 Speaker 1: the defense has a series of rights to appeal, and 225 00:14:11,760 --> 00:14:17,120 Speaker 1: those can be pursued. There is always the possibility, although 226 00:14:17,200 --> 00:14:19,960 Speaker 1: this in a sense leaves the realm of law and 227 00:14:20,200 --> 00:14:25,000 Speaker 1: enters the realms of politics and diplomacy that states concerned 228 00:14:25,040 --> 00:14:28,640 Speaker 1: about their own citizens who are convicted of crimes and 229 00:14:28,680 --> 00:14:33,200 Speaker 1: other countries can seek to do prisoner exchanges or to 230 00:14:33,320 --> 00:14:35,960 Speaker 1: request that the individual will be allowed to serve his 231 00:14:36,080 --> 00:14:39,320 Speaker 1: or her sentence in the home country. And you're right 232 00:14:39,400 --> 00:14:42,480 Speaker 1: to mention that there are other American citizens who have 233 00:14:42,600 --> 00:14:46,720 Speaker 1: been convicted of crimes in the Russian Federation. One is 234 00:14:46,800 --> 00:14:49,520 Speaker 1: a young man named Trevor Reid, who was a student 235 00:14:49,560 --> 00:14:53,000 Speaker 1: debt the University of North Texas. He was arrested in 236 00:14:53,040 --> 00:14:56,840 Speaker 1: August nineteen when his friends be called the police for 237 00:14:56,920 --> 00:15:00,720 Speaker 1: help with him after he was intoxicated it at a party, 238 00:15:01,000 --> 00:15:03,360 Speaker 1: and he was alleged to have assaulted the police in 239 00:15:03,400 --> 00:15:07,560 Speaker 1: their police car. The facts are highly contested, and his 240 00:15:07,840 --> 00:15:11,320 Speaker 1: friends and family and allies alleged that he was really 241 00:15:11,320 --> 00:15:15,920 Speaker 1: a victim of the Russian criminal justice system, and that 242 00:15:16,040 --> 00:15:18,320 Speaker 1: much of what he was alleged to have done was 243 00:15:18,480 --> 00:15:22,920 Speaker 1: either grossly exaggerated or simply not true. He was convicted 244 00:15:22,960 --> 00:15:27,240 Speaker 1: in July by a Moscow court after an eight day trial, 245 00:15:27,280 --> 00:15:30,520 Speaker 1: and sentenced to nine years in prison. The other person 246 00:15:30,800 --> 00:15:34,040 Speaker 1: is a man named Paul Wheelan. He was convicted of 247 00:15:34,280 --> 00:15:38,200 Speaker 1: spying and sentenced to sixteen years in jail. He was 248 00:15:38,280 --> 00:15:43,960 Speaker 1: arrested in December of eighteen and, allegedly by the Russians assertions, 249 00:15:44,000 --> 00:15:47,400 Speaker 1: caught red handed with a flash drive containing state secrets. 250 00:15:47,920 --> 00:15:50,680 Speaker 1: He has always maintained that he was set up and 251 00:15:50,880 --> 00:15:53,560 Speaker 1: that this was a flash drive that he was handed 252 00:15:53,560 --> 00:15:56,920 Speaker 1: by an acquaintance thinking that it just contained photographs of 253 00:15:56,960 --> 00:15:59,920 Speaker 1: a private nature, so he says he was completely framed 254 00:16:00,000 --> 00:16:03,240 Speaker 1: either system. His trial began in March twenty and was 255 00:16:03,320 --> 00:16:07,680 Speaker 1: mostly a closed door trial, and in June of he 256 00:16:07,840 --> 00:16:11,440 Speaker 1: was convicted and sentenced to sixteen years in prison. So 257 00:16:11,560 --> 00:16:15,600 Speaker 1: there is always a possibility of these prisoners swaps. MS 258 00:16:15,680 --> 00:16:20,120 Speaker 1: Grinder is not a convicted prisoner, and so it's hard 259 00:16:20,160 --> 00:16:23,360 Speaker 1: to imagine her in this same boat. But certainly it's 260 00:16:23,360 --> 00:16:25,760 Speaker 1: a matter of concern that all of this has taken 261 00:16:25,760 --> 00:16:29,200 Speaker 1: place in such a heated moment of high politics. The 262 00:16:29,200 --> 00:16:33,480 Speaker 1: State Department says that we're engaged on the case, but 263 00:16:33,880 --> 00:16:37,680 Speaker 1: they have no comment on it. Have there been efforts 264 00:16:37,720 --> 00:16:40,840 Speaker 1: to get read and wheeling out. I'm sure that their 265 00:16:40,880 --> 00:16:45,160 Speaker 1: families are trying everything that they possibly can and and 266 00:16:45,360 --> 00:16:48,200 Speaker 1: uh working with government officials to try to do so. 267 00:16:48,840 --> 00:16:51,800 Speaker 1: But they've been convicted by a Russian court, and the 268 00:16:52,280 --> 00:16:55,320 Speaker 1: Russians will say that they are serving their sentences, and 269 00:16:55,360 --> 00:16:59,360 Speaker 1: so how those discussions are continuing, if they're continuing, is 270 00:16:59,400 --> 00:17:02,440 Speaker 1: really something that I don't know. When you look at 271 00:17:02,520 --> 00:17:05,120 Speaker 1: what the Russian system is all about and you see 272 00:17:05,160 --> 00:17:09,119 Speaker 1: what has happened to Americans caught in the system, it 273 00:17:09,240 --> 00:17:12,119 Speaker 1: seems like it's going to be a tough road ahead 274 00:17:12,160 --> 00:17:16,080 Speaker 1: for Griner. It could conceivably be a long road ahead, 275 00:17:16,080 --> 00:17:18,639 Speaker 1: and certainly a tough road ahead. If she is in 276 00:17:18,880 --> 00:17:22,480 Speaker 1: a pre trial detention facility in Russia, that's a very 277 00:17:22,560 --> 00:17:25,760 Speaker 1: unpleasant place to be. The next pictures that we might 278 00:17:25,840 --> 00:17:29,080 Speaker 1: see of her would show her behind a cage in 279 00:17:29,200 --> 00:17:33,800 Speaker 1: a Russian courtroom. Defendants in Russian courtrooms are often held 280 00:17:33,920 --> 00:17:39,280 Speaker 1: in cages to another sharp distinction, of course, from what 281 00:17:39,440 --> 00:17:42,480 Speaker 1: we see in an American courtroom. We'll have to wait 282 00:17:42,480 --> 00:17:46,520 Speaker 1: and see whether the case proceeds and how it proceeds, 283 00:17:46,560 --> 00:17:51,120 Speaker 1: but it's certainly deeply concerning. Thanks jeff. That's Jeffrey Cohn 284 00:17:51,240 --> 00:17:56,879 Speaker 1: of SMU Law School. In a unanimous decision, the Taxas 285 00:17:56,880 --> 00:18:00,720 Speaker 1: Supreme Court shut down a closely watched legal allans to 286 00:18:00,800 --> 00:18:03,560 Speaker 1: the state's abortion law. One of the most restrictive in 287 00:18:03,600 --> 00:18:07,440 Speaker 1: the country. The law deputizes citizens to enforce a ban 288 00:18:07,560 --> 00:18:11,440 Speaker 1: on abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy by suing 289 00:18:11,480 --> 00:18:15,240 Speaker 1: anyone for helping a woman end an unwanted pregnancy passed 290 00:18:15,280 --> 00:18:18,600 Speaker 1: that cut off date. The Texas High Court rule that 291 00:18:18,680 --> 00:18:22,760 Speaker 1: clinics and women's rights advocates can't sue state medical licensing 292 00:18:22,760 --> 00:18:26,359 Speaker 1: officials because they have no enforcement authority. That means the 293 00:18:26,440 --> 00:18:30,240 Speaker 1: law will remain in place for the foreseeable future. Joining 294 00:18:30,240 --> 00:18:34,399 Speaker 1: me is Bloomberg Legal reporter Laurel Caulkins. Laurel tell us 295 00:18:34,440 --> 00:18:37,840 Speaker 1: about the decision, Well, the thing that's really important to 296 00:18:37,880 --> 00:18:41,000 Speaker 1: know about the Texas Supreme Court decision is it means 297 00:18:41,000 --> 00:18:44,200 Speaker 1: that the abortion clinics lost a major battle that they've 298 00:18:44,320 --> 00:18:48,120 Speaker 1: not yet lost the whole war. The analogy would be 299 00:18:48,400 --> 00:18:52,119 Speaker 1: the clinics have lost Marry youthful that they haven't lost Kiev. 300 00:18:53,240 --> 00:18:55,800 Speaker 1: The reason why that is, and this is a bit 301 00:18:55,800 --> 00:18:58,960 Speaker 1: of a tale to stick with me, um, the Supreme 302 00:18:58,960 --> 00:19:01,800 Speaker 1: Court only had liver of the case to look at 303 00:19:01,840 --> 00:19:05,040 Speaker 1: in the first place, because the U. S. Supreme Court 304 00:19:05,480 --> 00:19:09,200 Speaker 1: in December essentially gutted the challenge that the Texas abortion 305 00:19:09,240 --> 00:19:12,480 Speaker 1: clinics had brought to the law. They said, We're not 306 00:19:12,480 --> 00:19:15,000 Speaker 1: even gonna look at constitutionality, We're just gonna look at 307 00:19:15,000 --> 00:19:18,200 Speaker 1: the mechanics of the law, which is very unique, and 308 00:19:18,280 --> 00:19:22,960 Speaker 1: so the U. S. Supreme Court um essentially gutted it 309 00:19:23,000 --> 00:19:26,119 Speaker 1: down to where all that was left was the ability 310 00:19:26,119 --> 00:19:29,439 Speaker 1: of the clinics to sue state medical licensing professionals to 311 00:19:29,480 --> 00:19:32,720 Speaker 1: try to stop the law, which is pretty narrow. And 312 00:19:33,320 --> 00:19:35,719 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court sent that over to the Fifth Circuit 313 00:19:35,760 --> 00:19:38,320 Speaker 1: with orders to send it down to have it tried immediately. 314 00:19:38,840 --> 00:19:41,280 Speaker 1: And then the Fifth Circuit, as it so often does lately, 315 00:19:41,680 --> 00:19:46,159 Speaker 1: decided to intentionally misread those instructions and instead detoward the 316 00:19:46,240 --> 00:19:50,199 Speaker 1: question over to the Texas Supreme Court and said, uh, 317 00:19:50,359 --> 00:19:52,719 Speaker 1: Texas Supreme Court. We want you to second guest the U. S. 318 00:19:52,720 --> 00:19:56,440 Speaker 1: Supreme Court and where they right. And even though one 319 00:19:56,440 --> 00:19:59,760 Speaker 1: of the Texas Supreme Court justices warned, if we just 320 00:19:59,840 --> 00:20:01,560 Speaker 1: a agree with the Supreme Court, it will be like 321 00:20:01,680 --> 00:20:04,320 Speaker 1: summing our noses at the High Court, That's exactly what 322 00:20:04,359 --> 00:20:07,240 Speaker 1: the Texas Supreme Court decided to do. They threw out 323 00:20:07,359 --> 00:20:10,760 Speaker 1: the clinics ability to suit these medical licensing professionals, saying 324 00:20:11,160 --> 00:20:14,720 Speaker 1: they don't even indirectly enforce the law. So essentially the 325 00:20:14,720 --> 00:20:17,399 Speaker 1: case is now dead in that in that lane, that 326 00:20:17,480 --> 00:20:19,720 Speaker 1: piece of the challenge is now dead. The clinics have 327 00:20:19,800 --> 00:20:23,000 Speaker 1: no one left to sue proactively to try to stop 328 00:20:23,320 --> 00:20:28,160 Speaker 1: UM any of this litigation. What other lawsuits are there 329 00:20:28,880 --> 00:20:34,399 Speaker 1: that could help abortion providers in Texas well? Fortunately for 330 00:20:34,480 --> 00:20:38,119 Speaker 1: the clinics, there's three other fights ongoing. UM. They've been 331 00:20:38,200 --> 00:20:40,679 Speaker 1: largely under the radar, and I'm we're just kind of 332 00:20:40,680 --> 00:20:42,520 Speaker 1: waiting to see what's gonna happen to him at this point. 333 00:20:42,920 --> 00:20:47,080 Speaker 1: One of them, UH is happening in Texas state courts 334 00:20:47,200 --> 00:20:49,960 Speaker 1: where a number of these same clinics that that went 335 00:20:50,000 --> 00:20:53,160 Speaker 1: to the state went to the Supreme Court. Um. These 336 00:20:53,359 --> 00:20:58,199 Speaker 1: clinics and abortion supporters and therapists and various others sued 337 00:20:58,320 --> 00:21:02,000 Speaker 1: a bunch of antio portion activists, primarily Texas Right to 338 00:21:02,080 --> 00:21:05,160 Speaker 1: Life and others who had threatened to sue them as 339 00:21:05,280 --> 00:21:09,480 Speaker 1: vigilantes under this Texas abortion van and all of those 340 00:21:09,520 --> 00:21:12,160 Speaker 1: actions were rolled together in front of one judge in Austin, 341 00:21:12,760 --> 00:21:14,600 Speaker 1: and that judge looked at it and said, well, that 342 00:21:14,680 --> 00:21:18,280 Speaker 1: law is unconstitutional and I will protect you people from 343 00:21:18,320 --> 00:21:21,440 Speaker 1: those particular lawsuits, but I won't issue a larger block 344 00:21:21,520 --> 00:21:24,119 Speaker 1: against the law at this stage of the litigation. So 345 00:21:24,160 --> 00:21:27,120 Speaker 1: an intermediate Texas State of pelate court is chewing on that, 346 00:21:27,359 --> 00:21:29,480 Speaker 1: and eventually that will go back up to the Texas 347 00:21:29,480 --> 00:21:33,600 Speaker 1: Supreme Court, which should look at that point at constitutionality 348 00:21:33,640 --> 00:21:36,800 Speaker 1: of the law. They may, because they're all Republican court 349 00:21:36,880 --> 00:21:39,359 Speaker 1: may decide the side step the issue once against, but 350 00:21:39,440 --> 00:21:42,399 Speaker 1: hopefully they will look at the constitutionality at that point. 351 00:21:42,720 --> 00:21:46,679 Speaker 1: That said, the best challenge that's going right now is 352 00:21:46,800 --> 00:21:49,479 Speaker 1: way over in Chicago Federal Court. You may say, how 353 00:21:49,480 --> 00:21:53,480 Speaker 1: did you get there? Well, um, some of the vigilantes 354 00:21:53,520 --> 00:21:57,320 Speaker 1: were empowered by this Texas abortion law to actually bring lawsuits. 355 00:21:57,359 --> 00:22:00,880 Speaker 1: As the way the law intended against an abortion who 356 00:22:01,000 --> 00:22:03,919 Speaker 1: UH performed the first trimester abortion on a woman in Texas, 357 00:22:03,960 --> 00:22:06,080 Speaker 1: and he admitted it in a newspaper article. He was 358 00:22:06,080 --> 00:22:09,320 Speaker 1: trying to draw litigation in order to UM try to 359 00:22:09,320 --> 00:22:12,840 Speaker 1: get a court case started. So three vigilante sued him. 360 00:22:12,880 --> 00:22:15,239 Speaker 1: And under the law, these people can be anywhere, they 361 00:22:15,240 --> 00:22:17,560 Speaker 1: don't have to be in Texas, and one of them 362 00:22:17,560 --> 00:22:20,720 Speaker 1: happened to be in Chicago. So he used some legal 363 00:22:20,760 --> 00:22:24,560 Speaker 1: maneuvers to get all of those little vigilanty actions against 364 00:22:24,600 --> 00:22:28,000 Speaker 1: him transferred to federal court in Chicago. And what's good 365 00:22:28,040 --> 00:22:31,760 Speaker 1: about that, the clinics is that that is now sitting 366 00:22:31,800 --> 00:22:35,120 Speaker 1: in front of a democratically appointed judge by Bill Clintons, 367 00:22:35,800 --> 00:22:38,520 Speaker 1: and that judge is not on the same appellate track 368 00:22:38,640 --> 00:22:41,879 Speaker 1: that would take his decision to either the Texas Supreme 369 00:22:41,920 --> 00:22:44,000 Speaker 1: Court or to the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans, which 370 00:22:44,240 --> 00:22:47,960 Speaker 1: is die hard anti abortion. So that judge is already 371 00:22:47,960 --> 00:22:50,240 Speaker 1: said I'm gonna look at the constitutionality of this question, 372 00:22:51,000 --> 00:22:53,479 Speaker 1: and so it really could be decided in Chicago, and 373 00:22:53,680 --> 00:22:55,119 Speaker 1: at that point it could go back up to the 374 00:22:55,119 --> 00:22:58,000 Speaker 1: Supreme Court in DC. And then there's a third case, 375 00:22:58,720 --> 00:23:02,720 Speaker 1: which was the much badly who Biden administration. UH lawsuit 376 00:23:02,720 --> 00:23:06,000 Speaker 1: against the Texas law, which got sucked in with the 377 00:23:06,000 --> 00:23:10,159 Speaker 1: clinics challenge to the U. S. Supreme Court. US Supreme 378 00:23:10,160 --> 00:23:12,560 Speaker 1: Court rejected it on an emergency basis, sent it back 379 00:23:12,600 --> 00:23:14,920 Speaker 1: down to the Fifth Circuit, and we fully expect the 380 00:23:14,960 --> 00:23:17,600 Speaker 1: Fifth Circuit to strangle at Nis crib. So that's probably 381 00:23:17,600 --> 00:23:20,280 Speaker 1: going nowhere. The best bet is the Chicago litigation of 382 00:23:20,320 --> 00:23:22,679 Speaker 1: my mind, but this case is going back to the 383 00:23:22,680 --> 00:23:26,240 Speaker 1: Fifth Circuit for the Fifth Circuit to do what Well, 384 00:23:26,320 --> 00:23:29,800 Speaker 1: under Fifth Circuit precedent, the Fifth Circuit has to follow 385 00:23:29,840 --> 00:23:32,000 Speaker 1: the advice of the Texas Supreme Court because they said 386 00:23:32,040 --> 00:23:34,320 Speaker 1: give us advice. Well, now they have to follow the advice. 387 00:23:34,600 --> 00:23:37,879 Speaker 1: And the Texas Supreme Court said, under our interpretation of 388 00:23:37,960 --> 00:23:41,840 Speaker 1: state law, the clinics cannot sue those state licensing officials. 389 00:23:41,880 --> 00:23:43,320 Speaker 1: And that was the only piece of the case that 390 00:23:43,400 --> 00:23:45,520 Speaker 1: was still alive when it came down from the U. S. 391 00:23:45,520 --> 00:23:48,440 Speaker 1: Supreme Court. So it's the Fifth Circuits just gonna rubber 392 00:23:48,480 --> 00:23:52,080 Speaker 1: stamp the depth certificate. And not only that, Laurel, the 393 00:23:52,119 --> 00:23:55,920 Speaker 1: Texas abortion law has been at the Supreme Court twice. 394 00:23:56,760 --> 00:23:58,359 Speaker 1: Is it possible that it will go back to the 395 00:23:58,400 --> 00:24:01,399 Speaker 1: Supreme Court? Yeah, but there wouldn't be any point in 396 00:24:01,400 --> 00:24:03,879 Speaker 1: it because it's Supreme Court. We'll say, well, we're just 397 00:24:03,880 --> 00:24:07,160 Speaker 1: gonna send it back down. They would be a repeating loop. 398 00:24:07,160 --> 00:24:09,040 Speaker 1: But I didn't. I don't think that one has any 399 00:24:09,119 --> 00:24:11,320 Speaker 1: any life left. And even the clinics have said, you know, 400 00:24:11,359 --> 00:24:13,159 Speaker 1: this one's dead. We're not going to be able to 401 00:24:13,200 --> 00:24:16,199 Speaker 1: go anywhere with this one. Tell us what's happened, you know, 402 00:24:16,440 --> 00:24:20,080 Speaker 1: on the ground in Texas? Are there any abortion providers 403 00:24:20,160 --> 00:24:23,840 Speaker 1: who had enough gumption to stay open and continue to 404 00:24:23,880 --> 00:24:28,199 Speaker 1: provide abortions despite the fact that they may be sued 405 00:24:28,240 --> 00:24:34,920 Speaker 1: by anybody who learns about it? Yeah, anybody anywhere? Law um. Yeah. 406 00:24:35,000 --> 00:24:37,119 Speaker 1: The thing that's that's the most troubling about this, there 407 00:24:37,160 --> 00:24:39,119 Speaker 1: are there are clinics that have remained open, but they 408 00:24:39,160 --> 00:24:43,040 Speaker 1: are sharply curtailing the types of abortions they provide. They're 409 00:24:43,080 --> 00:24:47,959 Speaker 1: doing only very early stage abortions, which under the law, uh, 410 00:24:48,240 --> 00:24:52,399 Speaker 1: they can't perform an abortion after cardiac activity is detected 411 00:24:52,440 --> 00:24:56,880 Speaker 1: in the fetus, and that's generally around six weeks of pregnancy, 412 00:24:56,960 --> 00:24:58,639 Speaker 1: which is a time when most women don't even know 413 00:24:58,640 --> 00:25:03,520 Speaker 1: they're pregnant. Yet, so very few women are getting abortions 414 00:25:03,600 --> 00:25:08,320 Speaker 1: at clinics anymore. The statistics show that abortions in Texas 415 00:25:08,320 --> 00:25:12,080 Speaker 1: have fallen six since September one of last year, when 416 00:25:12,080 --> 00:25:15,560 Speaker 1: this law took effect. On the ground, evidence shows that 417 00:25:15,800 --> 00:25:18,399 Speaker 1: many Texas women have been able to travel out of 418 00:25:18,440 --> 00:25:23,360 Speaker 1: state to receive abortion care or have received mail order 419 00:25:23,920 --> 00:25:27,200 Speaker 1: abortion pills um, which are medically accepted up to a 420 00:25:27,280 --> 00:25:30,800 Speaker 1: certain stage of early pregnancy. So there are women are 421 00:25:30,800 --> 00:25:34,240 Speaker 1: still Texas women are still being able to get services, 422 00:25:34,280 --> 00:25:36,760 Speaker 1: but they're not doing it in clinics anymore because the 423 00:25:36,840 --> 00:25:39,720 Speaker 1: threat of litigation is just crippling. Um. The way the 424 00:25:39,800 --> 00:25:41,439 Speaker 1: law is set up, That's the whole thing is that 425 00:25:41,520 --> 00:25:43,960 Speaker 1: the law was set up in a fairly diabolical fashion. 426 00:25:44,440 --> 00:25:49,160 Speaker 1: It was fashion so that any vigilanity is now deputized 427 00:25:49,240 --> 00:25:51,920 Speaker 1: to be a bounty hunters. They can sue anyone who 428 00:25:52,000 --> 00:25:56,120 Speaker 1: aids orbits an abortion in Texas after this cardiac activity 429 00:25:56,119 --> 00:25:59,480 Speaker 1: cutoff period, and they can get a minimum of a 430 00:25:59,560 --> 00:26:01,560 Speaker 1: ten thous and dollar damages a word, whether they have 431 00:26:01,640 --> 00:26:04,680 Speaker 1: any connection to this abortion whatsoever, which is sort of 432 00:26:04,960 --> 00:26:07,479 Speaker 1: not the way laws are supposed to work. You're supposed 433 00:26:07,480 --> 00:26:10,199 Speaker 1: to be compensated for damages you've suffered, and that's not 434 00:26:10,200 --> 00:26:14,960 Speaker 1: how this law works, and so also, UM, the people 435 00:26:15,000 --> 00:26:17,760 Speaker 1: who bring the lawsuits, the bounty hunters, all of their 436 00:26:17,840 --> 00:26:20,560 Speaker 1: legal expenses will be paid. But if the clinics happen 437 00:26:20,600 --> 00:26:23,119 Speaker 1: to win, none of their expenses will be paid. They 438 00:26:23,119 --> 00:26:26,200 Speaker 1: can't recover their expenses from their opponents. So the law 439 00:26:26,280 --> 00:26:30,640 Speaker 1: is very cleverly stacked to make it crippling for UH 440 00:26:31,280 --> 00:26:33,960 Speaker 1: clinics to run the risk of being exposed to this 441 00:26:34,040 --> 00:26:36,520 Speaker 1: kind of litigation because they could see somebody could see 442 00:26:36,520 --> 00:26:38,359 Speaker 1: the reception that somebody could see, the uber driver who 443 00:26:38,440 --> 00:26:42,520 Speaker 1: drops the patient off. Somebody could sue the doctors, the nurses. Um, 444 00:26:42,560 --> 00:26:44,840 Speaker 1: there's people who want to sue the insurance companies that 445 00:26:44,920 --> 00:26:48,919 Speaker 1: pay for this. They want to sue the the women's 446 00:26:48,960 --> 00:26:52,280 Speaker 1: reproductive rights funds that have come forward to try to 447 00:26:52,320 --> 00:26:55,120 Speaker 1: help women get out of state. I mean, it's it's 448 00:26:55,119 --> 00:26:59,960 Speaker 1: pretty right, it's pretty broad ranging, and other states are 449 00:27:00,119 --> 00:27:05,080 Speaker 1: now following this law, attempting to follow this law, mimicking 450 00:27:05,119 --> 00:27:09,880 Speaker 1: what Texas has done. Absolutely, the copycats are already lining up, 451 00:27:10,440 --> 00:27:13,119 Speaker 1: but several different states, and many of them are not 452 00:27:13,200 --> 00:27:16,639 Speaker 1: particularly abortion friendly. But Plain Parents who has said in 453 00:27:16,720 --> 00:27:21,760 Speaker 1: Oklahoma that its patients are now from Texas and Oklahoma, 454 00:27:21,840 --> 00:27:24,800 Speaker 1: just I believe it's this last week, UM in their 455 00:27:25,000 --> 00:27:27,800 Speaker 1: House of Representatives passed the law that even worse than 456 00:27:27,840 --> 00:27:31,600 Speaker 1: the Texas law, so it will essentially shut down Oklahoma 457 00:27:31,640 --> 00:27:34,640 Speaker 1: as an avenue for Texas women. Louisiana only has one 458 00:27:35,320 --> 00:27:38,520 Speaker 1: functioning clinic, and so they're overwhelmed and they're having to 459 00:27:38,600 --> 00:27:42,280 Speaker 1: route their own patients to Arkansas, which also has restrictions, 460 00:27:42,280 --> 00:27:45,879 Speaker 1: in Mississippi, which has even worse restrictions, and so Colorado 461 00:27:45,920 --> 00:27:48,520 Speaker 1: has been getting a lot of the Texas patients. New 462 00:27:48,600 --> 00:27:51,040 Speaker 1: Mexico has been getting a lot of patients. But there's 463 00:27:51,080 --> 00:27:54,040 Speaker 1: so many women that are so desperate to seek care 464 00:27:54,880 --> 00:27:57,600 Speaker 1: UM that they're overwhelming the system. So women are being 465 00:27:57,680 --> 00:28:00,760 Speaker 1: pushed further and further into their pregnancies, which makes things 466 00:28:01,119 --> 00:28:04,720 Speaker 1: more costly and more dangerous for them to undergo abortions. 467 00:28:04,760 --> 00:28:07,359 Speaker 1: And we understand that women are now being flown to 468 00:28:08,240 --> 00:28:12,920 Speaker 1: New York, New England, California, other venues where they can 469 00:28:12,920 --> 00:28:15,199 Speaker 1: find an appointment before it becomes too late for them 470 00:28:15,240 --> 00:28:18,480 Speaker 1: to have an abortion. And in not only in Oklahoma, 471 00:28:18,760 --> 00:28:22,800 Speaker 1: Idaho passed an exact mirror image of Texas law, I 472 00:28:22,800 --> 00:28:25,880 Speaker 1: think yesterday, So it's it's spreading. And what's really interesting 473 00:28:25,960 --> 00:28:30,000 Speaker 1: is the mechanism which prevents people that are being targeted 474 00:28:30,240 --> 00:28:34,080 Speaker 1: for their constitutional right exercising their constitutional rights. The mechanism 475 00:28:34,080 --> 00:28:37,800 Speaker 1: can be used to undercut any constitutional right, and California 476 00:28:37,880 --> 00:28:41,400 Speaker 1: kind of decided to flip that script, and uh they 477 00:28:41,440 --> 00:28:44,640 Speaker 1: have been to. California has introduced gun control legislation that's 478 00:28:44,680 --> 00:28:47,560 Speaker 1: designed the same way so that anybody who objects to 479 00:28:48,400 --> 00:28:51,880 Speaker 1: someone who uses an automatic rifle and a gun crime, 480 00:28:52,000 --> 00:28:54,719 Speaker 1: or sells automatic rifles or whatever, they can bring these 481 00:28:54,720 --> 00:28:57,040 Speaker 1: same kind of vigility actions, or at least California is 482 00:28:57,240 --> 00:29:00,400 Speaker 1: trying that theory. Will see how it works, Laurel. I 483 00:29:00,640 --> 00:29:03,440 Speaker 1: noticed that the Texas governor said that, you know, Texas 484 00:29:03,520 --> 00:29:07,760 Speaker 1: Republican politicians vowed to keep fighting for these abortion laws. 485 00:29:08,320 --> 00:29:13,280 Speaker 1: Are the majority of Texans opposed to abortion? I don't 486 00:29:13,280 --> 00:29:16,800 Speaker 1: think so. I haven't seen the latest results, but it's 487 00:29:16,840 --> 00:29:19,520 Speaker 1: like with most of these culture war issues, you have 488 00:29:19,600 --> 00:29:23,800 Speaker 1: a very vocal percentage on the far right that drives 489 00:29:23,800 --> 00:29:27,240 Speaker 1: the agenda. And these are the people that vote these uh, 490 00:29:27,440 --> 00:29:30,800 Speaker 1: hard right politicians into office in the primary elections, and 491 00:29:30,800 --> 00:29:33,520 Speaker 1: then they don't get defeated by Democrats in the state 492 00:29:33,520 --> 00:29:40,560 Speaker 1: wide elections, so the political landscape is dominated by anti abortion. 493 00:29:41,120 --> 00:29:44,320 Speaker 1: The actual countryside I don't think feels that way. It 494 00:29:44,400 --> 00:29:47,040 Speaker 1: may be getting a closer call, but I don't even 495 00:29:47,080 --> 00:29:49,680 Speaker 1: think we're fifty fifty. I think I think Texas is 496 00:29:49,720 --> 00:29:54,360 Speaker 1: still moderately pro choice. I don't have the latest numbers, though. 497 00:29:55,080 --> 00:29:58,960 Speaker 1: The strategy behind this law seems to be working for 498 00:29:59,040 --> 00:30:03,800 Speaker 1: anti abortion activists. It seems as if the anti abortion 499 00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:07,360 Speaker 1: activists have been reading the business Bible of the Art 500 00:30:07,400 --> 00:30:10,840 Speaker 1: of War by sun Zoos, because they're actually winning by 501 00:30:10,880 --> 00:30:15,160 Speaker 1: not playing. Uh, by having this crippling threat of litigation 502 00:30:15,280 --> 00:30:18,480 Speaker 1: hanging over the clinics and the abortion doctors, where if 503 00:30:18,480 --> 00:30:20,360 Speaker 1: you do anything, we're going to come sue you for 504 00:30:20,480 --> 00:30:24,320 Speaker 1: everything you've got. Well, the threat is enough they don't 505 00:30:24,360 --> 00:30:26,320 Speaker 1: have to actually bring the suit. And by not bringing 506 00:30:26,320 --> 00:30:28,880 Speaker 1: the suit then the abortion clinics and the doctor's hands 507 00:30:28,880 --> 00:30:31,560 Speaker 1: are tied. They can't challenge it in court. So it's 508 00:30:31,600 --> 00:30:33,960 Speaker 1: the art of war winning by not playing, and it 509 00:30:34,000 --> 00:30:37,880 Speaker 1: seems to be working spectacularly. Thanks Laurel. That's Laurel Caulkins, 510 00:30:38,040 --> 00:30:42,200 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Legal Reporter. This skirmishing comes as a Supreme Court 511 00:30:42,280 --> 00:30:46,520 Speaker 1: deliberates over a Mississippi case that could overturn the landmark 512 00:30:47,680 --> 00:30:52,560 Speaker 1: three Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion nationwide. And 513 00:30:52,600 --> 00:30:54,720 Speaker 1: that's it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. 514 00:30:55,080 --> 00:30:57,360 Speaker 1: Remember you can always get the latest legal news on 515 00:30:57,440 --> 00:31:01,920 Speaker 1: our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them Apple Podcasts, Spotify, 516 00:31:01,960 --> 00:31:06,960 Speaker 1: and at www dot bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law, 517 00:31:07,400 --> 00:31:10,000 Speaker 1: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every 518 00:31:10,040 --> 00:31:13,480 Speaker 1: week night at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June 519 00:31:13,480 --> 00:31:15,680 Speaker 1: Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg