WEBVTT - Kavanaugh Confirmation Enlivens Both Parties

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.440 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.319
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com Slash podcasts. With just one

0:00:22.360 --> 0:00:26.120
<v Speaker 1>month to go until the mid term elections, Republicans and

0:00:26.160 --> 0:00:30.320
<v Speaker 1>Democrats are looking to capitalize on Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation.

0:00:30.640 --> 0:00:35.040
<v Speaker 1>On November six, Speaking with Fox News Sunday Yesterday, send

0:00:35.080 --> 0:00:38.320
<v Speaker 1>Up Majority leader Mitch McConnell defended his party's handling of

0:00:38.360 --> 0:00:41.080
<v Speaker 1>the nomination. We didn't attack the nominee. We didn't go

0:00:41.120 --> 0:00:43.760
<v Speaker 1>on a search and destroy mission. I agree that with

0:00:44.000 --> 0:00:45.559
<v Speaker 1>Chuck show me this has been a low point in

0:00:45.600 --> 0:00:48.640
<v Speaker 1>the Senate. I have a different view about who caused

0:00:48.640 --> 0:00:51.640
<v Speaker 1>the low point. And joining us now is Anna Edgerton

0:00:51.720 --> 0:00:57.680
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg News Live in our Bloomberg studios in Washington, and

0:00:58.040 --> 0:01:01.440
<v Speaker 1>I keep hearing the Republicans are energized, and then I

0:01:01.560 --> 0:01:05.440
<v Speaker 1>keep hearing the Democrats are energized. Does anybody have the

0:01:05.560 --> 0:01:08.160
<v Speaker 1>edge out of this? Well, both sides are energized. The

0:01:08.200 --> 0:01:11.319
<v Speaker 1>difference is Democrats were already energized. So if you look

0:01:11.360 --> 0:01:15.200
<v Speaker 1>at enthusiasm from the Republican and Democratic base, Democrats were

0:01:15.240 --> 0:01:17.919
<v Speaker 1>already fired up. They've been fired up since twenty sixteen

0:01:17.920 --> 0:01:21.720
<v Speaker 1>when Donald Trump was elected. So the Republican base really

0:01:21.760 --> 0:01:24.759
<v Speaker 1>has more to gain in response to this really messy

0:01:24.840 --> 0:01:28.760
<v Speaker 1>confirmation fight. And looking at the mid terms and the

0:01:28.840 --> 0:01:33.280
<v Speaker 1>Senate seats in the mid terms, which senators are more

0:01:33.319 --> 0:01:37.840
<v Speaker 1>at risk because of the Kavanaugh nomination and confirmation. Well,

0:01:37.880 --> 0:01:41.400
<v Speaker 1>you have the Democratic senators in the states that Trump won,

0:01:41.480 --> 0:01:45.399
<v Speaker 1>like Heidi hide Camp who voted against kavanaughs confirmation. You

0:01:45.440 --> 0:01:48.080
<v Speaker 1>see Joe Mansion in West Virginia who evaded and voted

0:01:48.080 --> 0:01:51.240
<v Speaker 1>in favor of kavanaughs confirmation exactly for that fear. He

0:01:51.280 --> 0:01:54.840
<v Speaker 1>comes from a very conservative state that pretty much wanted

0:01:54.880 --> 0:01:58.840
<v Speaker 1>Kavanaugh confirmed. Another interesting Senate race to watch is in Tennessee,

0:01:59.040 --> 0:02:02.960
<v Speaker 1>where Phil Bretson, the Democrat, said that he would have

0:02:03.120 --> 0:02:06.040
<v Speaker 1>voted for Kavanaugh had he been in the Senate. He's

0:02:06.120 --> 0:02:10.040
<v Speaker 1>running against Republican Marsha Blackburn, who has not really managed

0:02:10.080 --> 0:02:13.440
<v Speaker 1>to create the enthusiasm among GOP voters in the gap

0:02:13.639 --> 0:02:17.600
<v Speaker 1>establishment in in the state of Tennessee. Joe Manchon did

0:02:17.639 --> 0:02:21.600
<v Speaker 1>he have everything to lose, but really nothing to gain

0:02:21.760 --> 0:02:24.600
<v Speaker 1>in West Virginia by voting the way he did well.

0:02:24.680 --> 0:02:27.080
<v Speaker 1>Joe Manon is a Democrat, but he's very popular in

0:02:27.080 --> 0:02:29.840
<v Speaker 1>West Virginia, and he was in a very strong position,

0:02:30.080 --> 0:02:33.120
<v Speaker 1>maybe even surprisingly so for a Democrat this year in

0:02:33.120 --> 0:02:36.639
<v Speaker 1>West Virginia. It was a tough situation for him. If

0:02:36.680 --> 0:02:39.280
<v Speaker 1>he voted against kavanaughs confirmation, he was going to face

0:02:39.320 --> 0:02:42.120
<v Speaker 1>a lot of backlash room conservatives in a state. But

0:02:42.440 --> 0:02:46.519
<v Speaker 1>voting for kavanaughs confirmation, he's faced some pushback from Democrats

0:02:46.560 --> 0:02:49.160
<v Speaker 1>in the state who said, listen, we want a Democrat

0:02:49.320 --> 0:02:53.240
<v Speaker 1>in the Senate to vote the way the Democrats vote.

0:02:53.480 --> 0:02:55.560
<v Speaker 1>So there really was no easy thing for him to do.

0:02:55.680 --> 0:02:59.200
<v Speaker 1>And it was interesting that he waited until after Susan Collins,

0:02:59.240 --> 0:03:01.800
<v Speaker 1>a Republican main had said that she would vote in

0:03:01.800 --> 0:03:04.280
<v Speaker 1>favor of Kavanaugh's confirmation, so we knew that he was

0:03:04.320 --> 0:03:06.040
<v Speaker 1>already going to be confirmed, and it was kind of

0:03:06.160 --> 0:03:08.200
<v Speaker 1>a little bit of a less of a consequence vote

0:03:08.200 --> 0:03:10.160
<v Speaker 1>for for Joe Manchon at least to not be the

0:03:10.240 --> 0:03:13.680
<v Speaker 1>deciding vote. What about Heidi hide Camp, what's happening with

0:03:13.760 --> 0:03:17.680
<v Speaker 1>her race now? I think she probably wanted to vote

0:03:17.720 --> 0:03:21.600
<v Speaker 1>against Kavanaugh initially, but she was kind of making noises

0:03:21.639 --> 0:03:24.400
<v Speaker 1>that she was considering voting in his favor. But these

0:03:24.440 --> 0:03:27.400
<v Speaker 1>allegations from Dr Blasi Ford made it a bit easier

0:03:27.400 --> 0:03:31.760
<v Speaker 1>for her to vote against Kavanaugh's confirmation. So one of

0:03:31.800 --> 0:03:35.080
<v Speaker 1>the outcomes that we see from the allegations that surfaced

0:03:35.520 --> 0:03:39.520
<v Speaker 1>last month is that some of the Democrats in conservative

0:03:39.560 --> 0:03:42.880
<v Speaker 1>states who would have voted for Kavanaugh's confirmation felt like

0:03:42.880 --> 0:03:45.320
<v Speaker 1>it was a little easier for them not to. There

0:03:45.400 --> 0:03:49.000
<v Speaker 1>was a Washington Post Our School poll of sixty nine

0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:53.520
<v Speaker 1>battle Ground District's release today and it showed that fifty

0:03:54.120 --> 0:03:57.960
<v Speaker 1>of those surveys said they preferred Democratic candidates compared to

0:03:59.320 --> 0:04:02.720
<v Speaker 1>who backed Republicans. That sounds to me like a sign

0:04:02.760 --> 0:04:06.440
<v Speaker 1>of potential trouble for the GOLP. Yeah. I mean, the

0:04:06.480 --> 0:04:09.560
<v Speaker 1>GP was already facing headwinds in this midterm, so the

0:04:09.640 --> 0:04:12.360
<v Speaker 1>best they could hope for from the fallout from this

0:04:12.520 --> 0:04:15.040
<v Speaker 1>kavanaff fight is that they would close some of the

0:04:15.080 --> 0:04:17.960
<v Speaker 1>gap that they were already facing. And one thing I

0:04:17.960 --> 0:04:20.359
<v Speaker 1>think you'll see from Americans is that a lot of

0:04:20.400 --> 0:04:24.279
<v Speaker 1>people might want divided government, in which case they could

0:04:24.400 --> 0:04:27.280
<v Speaker 1>vote for a Democrat for the House and a Republican

0:04:27.360 --> 0:04:29.599
<v Speaker 1>for the Senate as kind of a way to check

0:04:30.080 --> 0:04:33.280
<v Speaker 1>the President and the Trump White House and not give

0:04:33.320 --> 0:04:36.240
<v Speaker 1>Republicans full control of government as they've had for the

0:04:36.279 --> 0:04:39.960
<v Speaker 1>past two years. So, Heidi, what do you see President

0:04:40.000 --> 0:04:45.040
<v Speaker 1>Trump doing in the various locations he's going to be? Sorry, Anna,

0:04:45.279 --> 0:04:47.159
<v Speaker 1>how what do you see President Trump doing in the

0:04:47.200 --> 0:04:49.720
<v Speaker 1>locations that he's going to be campaigning in in the

0:04:49.760 --> 0:04:52.560
<v Speaker 1>next month. Well, Trump is, as we know, kind of

0:04:52.560 --> 0:04:55.160
<v Speaker 1>a no holds barred kind of guy. So I think

0:04:55.200 --> 0:04:58.680
<v Speaker 1>it's going to be very strategic where Republicans choose to

0:04:58.720 --> 0:05:01.640
<v Speaker 1>send the President where he chooses to go. He's only

0:05:01.640 --> 0:05:04.440
<v Speaker 1>going to go to those states or those districts where

0:05:04.440 --> 0:05:07.920
<v Speaker 1>he can really let loose and say, you know, raw, team,

0:05:08.000 --> 0:05:11.640
<v Speaker 1>we're getting all these conservative wins. We're just winning, winning,

0:05:11.680 --> 0:05:14.960
<v Speaker 1>winning fight the Democrats. And he's going to go to

0:05:15.040 --> 0:05:18.719
<v Speaker 1>states where that is well received. You'll probably see less

0:05:18.760 --> 0:05:21.240
<v Speaker 1>of President Trump and less of other White House officials

0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:25.200
<v Speaker 1>in the really close swing districts where a moderate Republican

0:05:25.240 --> 0:05:27.479
<v Speaker 1>has a better chance of winning. Listen, a half minute

0:05:27.560 --> 0:05:30.960
<v Speaker 1>left here. Hasn't this sort of welcome people up on

0:05:31.040 --> 0:05:34.000
<v Speaker 1>both sides of the aisle? Yeah? I think that's true.

0:05:34.279 --> 0:05:37.599
<v Speaker 1>Like I said before, Democrats were already energized. So poles

0:05:37.640 --> 0:05:41.920
<v Speaker 1>show that Republicans have gained in uh the gap of

0:05:42.080 --> 0:05:44.359
<v Speaker 1>the enthusiasm gap that they had compared to Democrats at

0:05:44.360 --> 0:05:46.760
<v Speaker 1>the beginning of the month. So we'll see. You know,

0:05:46.800 --> 0:05:48.600
<v Speaker 1>it all comes down to turn out like in every

0:05:48.600 --> 0:05:51.680
<v Speaker 1>other midterm race. All right, Anna, thanks so much for

0:05:51.760 --> 0:06:01.279
<v Speaker 1>being here. That's Bloomberg News congressional reporter and Edtiner. On Saturday,

0:06:01.480 --> 0:06:05.400
<v Speaker 1>the long, nasty fight finally all came to an end.

0:06:05.560 --> 0:06:08.560
<v Speaker 1>The Senate voted fifty to forty eight to confirm Brett

0:06:08.600 --> 0:06:11.359
<v Speaker 1>Kavanaugh to become an Associate Justice on the U. S.

0:06:11.360 --> 0:06:14.560
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court. To call the process contentious would be a

0:06:14.600 --> 0:06:19.320
<v Speaker 1>gross understatement. There were charges of sexual assault, drunken partying,

0:06:19.680 --> 0:06:23.440
<v Speaker 1>a sense of entitlement, and more. As main Republican Susan

0:06:23.440 --> 0:06:27.080
<v Speaker 1>Collins officially lifted all those clouds hanging over the nomination

0:06:27.440 --> 0:06:30.000
<v Speaker 1>in an impassioned speech on the Senate floor on Friday,

0:06:30.040 --> 0:06:37.080
<v Speaker 1>she limited the divisive process. Our Supreme Court confirmation process

0:06:37.279 --> 0:06:41.520
<v Speaker 1>has been in steady decline for more than thirty years.

0:06:42.279 --> 0:06:49.040
<v Speaker 1>One can only hope that the Kavanaugh nomination is where

0:06:49.160 --> 0:06:54.240
<v Speaker 1>the process has finally had rock bottom? Well has it?

0:06:54.520 --> 0:06:57.400
<v Speaker 1>We are joined now by Neil Kinkoff, Professor at Georgia

0:06:57.440 --> 0:07:01.080
<v Speaker 1>State University School of Law. Thank you very much for

0:07:01.279 --> 0:07:04.719
<v Speaker 1>joining us. Senator Collins may have ended the questions about

0:07:04.720 --> 0:07:07.880
<v Speaker 1>his confirmation, but she she didn't end the questions about

0:07:07.920 --> 0:07:12.040
<v Speaker 1>his partisanship, his lack of judicial temperaments as seen by

0:07:12.080 --> 0:07:17.400
<v Speaker 1>some How do those things follow Kavanaugh into the courtroom? Well,

0:07:17.920 --> 0:07:20.440
<v Speaker 1>I think it'll those will follow him into the courtroom

0:07:20.640 --> 0:07:24.080
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to really contentious issues that the court decides.

0:07:24.400 --> 0:07:28.760
<v Speaker 1>So primarily I'm thinking of the various questions that are

0:07:28.920 --> 0:07:34.120
<v Speaker 1>inevitable to arise out of the Mueller investigation. UM, it's

0:07:34.160 --> 0:07:37.280
<v Speaker 1>hard to imagine how he could look credible if he

0:07:37.480 --> 0:07:42.680
<v Speaker 1>votes UM in a way that favors the president. Neil,

0:07:42.800 --> 0:07:45.600
<v Speaker 1>let's talk to just a little bit about the justices.

0:07:45.800 --> 0:07:50.040
<v Speaker 1>And the justices are coming behind him, and they're saying

0:07:50.120 --> 0:07:54.760
<v Speaker 1>all the right things. But we know that former Justice

0:07:54.880 --> 0:07:57.960
<v Speaker 1>John Paul Stevens was not of the same mind. He

0:07:58.000 --> 0:08:00.240
<v Speaker 1>said that he was not fit to sir of on

0:08:00.320 --> 0:08:03.840
<v Speaker 1>the Supreme Court. Do you believe that some of the

0:08:03.960 --> 0:08:07.160
<v Speaker 1>justices might feel that way as well? But are just

0:08:07.560 --> 0:08:09.600
<v Speaker 1>papering it over because I have to work with this

0:08:09.640 --> 0:08:13.240
<v Speaker 1>man for the rest of their careers. Yeah, I think

0:08:13.280 --> 0:08:16.240
<v Speaker 1>that's absolutely possible. Um, they have to work with him

0:08:16.400 --> 0:08:19.240
<v Speaker 1>for the rest of their careers. They form coalitions, so

0:08:19.280 --> 0:08:21.840
<v Speaker 1>they're going to want to appeal to him. Um. And

0:08:21.880 --> 0:08:26.280
<v Speaker 1>also the the institution itself is at stake, and they

0:08:26.320 --> 0:08:29.520
<v Speaker 1>are all very deeply invested in it. So they want

0:08:29.560 --> 0:08:33.440
<v Speaker 1>to make the court look um, nonpartisan, look like a

0:08:33.559 --> 0:08:36.960
<v Speaker 1>viable um institution that we should all put our faith in.

0:08:37.120 --> 0:08:40.800
<v Speaker 1>So that's in every justice's interest. So what can they

0:08:40.880 --> 0:08:44.480
<v Speaker 1>do at this point to make it seem as if

0:08:44.559 --> 0:08:47.400
<v Speaker 1>the court is not partisan? Does it depend on the

0:08:47.480 --> 0:08:50.080
<v Speaker 1>kind of cases they take? Might they take cases that

0:08:50.160 --> 0:08:53.440
<v Speaker 1>are narrower and don't relate as much to social issues

0:08:53.480 --> 0:08:57.480
<v Speaker 1>for a while? I think that's absolutely right. I think

0:08:57.480 --> 0:08:59.720
<v Speaker 1>they're going to try to bore us the death, put

0:08:59.760 --> 0:09:02.480
<v Speaker 1>us sleep, and hope that when we wake up we

0:09:02.520 --> 0:09:06.440
<v Speaker 1>will have largely forgotten about all of the late unpleasantness

0:09:07.920 --> 0:09:12.559
<v Speaker 1>we had. Obama era era Attorney General Eric Holder reacting

0:09:12.679 --> 0:09:18.199
<v Speaker 1>to the confirmation, he actually questioned the legitimacy of the court.

0:09:18.559 --> 0:09:23.680
<v Speaker 1>Could that be a serious problem down the road? Oh? Absolutely,

0:09:23.760 --> 0:09:26.200
<v Speaker 1>and it's it's not a new thing that the Court's

0:09:26.280 --> 0:09:29.880
<v Speaker 1>legitimacy would be called into question throughout history. That's happened

0:09:29.920 --> 0:09:33.560
<v Speaker 1>with some frequency. Um in the wake of Bush versus Gore,

0:09:33.600 --> 0:09:36.480
<v Speaker 1>there were some questions about it. I think certainly that

0:09:36.640 --> 0:09:41.120
<v Speaker 1>was lurking beneath all of the litigation around Obamacare, and

0:09:41.320 --> 0:09:45.280
<v Speaker 1>Chief Justice Roberts was especially concerned that the Court not

0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:48.360
<v Speaker 1>look like it was acting in a partisan fashion to

0:09:48.559 --> 0:09:52.600
<v Speaker 1>undo the signature program of a Democratic president with only

0:09:52.679 --> 0:09:57.280
<v Speaker 1>Republican votes. So Chief Justice Roberts has been very attuned

0:09:57.320 --> 0:10:01.000
<v Speaker 1>to this throughout his time on the Court, and I think,

0:10:01.160 --> 0:10:04.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, this is a this is the biggest challenge

0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:06.520
<v Speaker 1>in that respect that he's going to face. So does

0:10:06.559 --> 0:10:08.320
<v Speaker 1>he or or the rest of the Court have to

0:10:08.360 --> 0:10:12.040
<v Speaker 1>do anything actively to regain the nation's trust, so to speak.

0:10:13.880 --> 0:10:15.880
<v Speaker 1>I think he's going to have to work hard to

0:10:15.920 --> 0:10:19.640
<v Speaker 1>try to build coalitions that aren't just five to four

0:10:19.720 --> 0:10:22.320
<v Speaker 1>partisan decisions. He's going to have to try to work

0:10:22.360 --> 0:10:26.640
<v Speaker 1>across the judicial aisle um and try to bring on

0:10:26.880 --> 0:10:31.679
<v Speaker 1>Justices Briar or Kagan or Justice ginsburg Um where they

0:10:31.760 --> 0:10:34.559
<v Speaker 1>can and where they can't. I think he's going to

0:10:34.679 --> 0:10:38.480
<v Speaker 1>have to be very careful to decide cases in a

0:10:38.720 --> 0:10:43.360
<v Speaker 1>narrower way if he really wants to preserve the court's

0:10:43.400 --> 0:10:48.520
<v Speaker 1>political capital. Justice Stevens, in his remarks, talked a little

0:10:48.520 --> 0:10:52.480
<v Speaker 1>bit about or referred to recusal from certain cases that

0:10:53.280 --> 0:10:56.760
<v Speaker 1>implying that there might be certain cases that Kavanaugh would

0:10:56.760 --> 0:10:59.280
<v Speaker 1>have to recuse himself from. Now you know, and I

0:10:59.320 --> 0:11:02.240
<v Speaker 1>know what the usal processes like on the Supreme Court.

0:11:02.640 --> 0:11:04.960
<v Speaker 1>No one knows why they were accusing, and there's no

0:11:05.120 --> 0:11:07.520
<v Speaker 1>there are no guidelines for them. So how likely is

0:11:07.559 --> 0:11:14.439
<v Speaker 1>that that he'll recuse himself? Well, I think it's really unlikely. Um,

0:11:14.480 --> 0:11:18.680
<v Speaker 1>he's not in any formal position of conflict with respect

0:11:18.679 --> 0:11:22.720
<v Speaker 1>the cases coming out of the Trump administration, and in fact,

0:11:23.360 --> 0:11:27.680
<v Speaker 1>no justice has ever accused themselves just because the case

0:11:27.760 --> 0:11:31.880
<v Speaker 1>involves the president who nominated them. Um is a long

0:11:31.920 --> 0:11:35.640
<v Speaker 1>tradition of justices ruling on those cases, and many instances

0:11:35.720 --> 0:11:39.600
<v Speaker 1>ruling against the president who appointed them. Um. So I

0:11:39.720 --> 0:11:43.360
<v Speaker 1>just I don't think he's going to be recusing himself.

0:11:43.360 --> 0:11:46.480
<v Speaker 1>And I can't imagine himself any more than to Justice

0:11:46.559 --> 0:11:52.360
<v Speaker 1>Thomas recusing himself in cases that involve claims of gender

0:11:52.440 --> 0:11:57.160
<v Speaker 1>discrimination or sex harassment. Does what Nicey is as the

0:11:57.240 --> 0:12:01.440
<v Speaker 1>breakdown of the process this time around. UH tell us

0:12:01.440 --> 0:12:07.120
<v Speaker 1>anything perhaps about the timing of future confirmations. Should the

0:12:07.240 --> 0:12:14.040
<v Speaker 1>Senate steer clear of of mid term election years for example? Well,

0:12:14.080 --> 0:12:16.720
<v Speaker 1>if they do that, then that puts half of the

0:12:16.800 --> 0:12:21.840
<v Speaker 1>years off the table. Um. I don't think they will. UM.

0:12:22.520 --> 0:12:27.000
<v Speaker 1>I think when these when these um, when these vacancies

0:12:27.040 --> 0:12:29.360
<v Speaker 1>come up the Senate is the presidents are going to

0:12:29.400 --> 0:12:32.440
<v Speaker 1>nominate in the Senate will confirm. Where that might come

0:12:32.440 --> 0:12:36.640
<v Speaker 1>into play is justices themselves when they decide to retire,

0:12:37.120 --> 0:12:39.959
<v Speaker 1>trying to time it so that they avoid election years

0:12:41.280 --> 0:12:43.480
<v Speaker 1>because we saw with but as we saw with with

0:12:43.559 --> 0:12:47.480
<v Speaker 1>Merrick Garland's vacancy for example, those those can be held.

0:12:47.720 --> 0:12:51.440
<v Speaker 1>So there there are no guarantees. Neil, what do you see?

0:12:51.480 --> 0:12:56.040
<v Speaker 1>There has been talk about UH having an impeachment possible

0:12:56.160 --> 0:12:59.160
<v Speaker 1>of Judge Kevinoll if Democrats retake the House. That's been

0:12:59.200 --> 0:13:02.360
<v Speaker 1>tried in the past but has never been successful with

0:13:02.440 --> 0:13:05.440
<v Speaker 1>a Senate vote. What are the what's the likelihood that

0:13:05.440 --> 0:13:10.720
<v Speaker 1>it might be tried again? It might be tried, it's

0:13:10.760 --> 0:13:14.360
<v Speaker 1>completely feudal. The likelihood of its succeeding is zero. Right,

0:13:14.600 --> 0:13:19.760
<v Speaker 1>you needed to did remove himself from the Court after

0:13:20.000 --> 0:13:24.839
<v Speaker 1>a talk of impeachment well and also after his nomination

0:13:24.920 --> 0:13:28.280
<v Speaker 1>to be Chief Justice had been rejected. Right, so it

0:13:28.320 --> 0:13:31.000
<v Speaker 1>was pretty clear that his continuing on the Court was

0:13:31.040 --> 0:13:35.080
<v Speaker 1>not tenable. And in that case, what was involved, we're

0:13:35.080 --> 0:13:41.240
<v Speaker 1>real credible allegations of financial and other sorts of improprieties. Um,

0:13:41.400 --> 0:13:44.480
<v Speaker 1>Judge Kavanaugh is not accepting that he's done anything wrong,

0:13:44.600 --> 0:13:49.040
<v Speaker 1>and so I I just can't imagine that the parallel

0:13:49.080 --> 0:13:51.880
<v Speaker 1>applying to him. It is going to be very interesting

0:13:51.920 --> 0:13:55.079
<v Speaker 1>watching this all play out. Our thanks to Neil Kinkoff,

0:13:55.360 --> 0:14:06.840
<v Speaker 1>professor at Georgia State University School of Law. President Trump

0:14:06.920 --> 0:14:10.520
<v Speaker 1>is celebrating the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

0:14:10.800 --> 0:14:13.720
<v Speaker 1>Speaking at a rally in Kansas on Saturday, Trump called

0:14:13.760 --> 0:14:18.800
<v Speaker 1>Kavanaugh an outstanding man. We have a great new Supreme

0:14:18.800 --> 0:14:21.480
<v Speaker 1>Court justice, and he's gonna be there for many years.

0:14:21.840 --> 0:14:24.080
<v Speaker 1>We are very very proud of him and what he

0:14:24.720 --> 0:14:28.160
<v Speaker 1>and his family had to endure. Looking into the future,

0:14:28.160 --> 0:14:32.120
<v Speaker 1>now we have Jonathan Adler, professor at Case Western Reserve

0:14:32.200 --> 0:14:35.320
<v Speaker 1>University School of Law and director of the Center for

0:14:35.440 --> 0:14:38.720
<v Speaker 1>Business Law and Regulation, on the line with us. Now,

0:14:39.360 --> 0:14:43.080
<v Speaker 1>obviously we won't actually know this until we see Brett

0:14:43.120 --> 0:14:45.360
<v Speaker 1>Kavanaugh at work on the U. S. Supreme Court, But

0:14:45.600 --> 0:14:48.520
<v Speaker 1>how influential could he be in shaping the High Court

0:14:48.640 --> 0:14:52.160
<v Speaker 1>far into the future. Well, I think he will be influential,

0:14:52.200 --> 0:14:55.800
<v Speaker 1>at least in those areas where he has shown a

0:14:55.840 --> 0:15:00.200
<v Speaker 1>great degree of expertise. Uh. He spent twelve years on

0:15:00.240 --> 0:15:02.120
<v Speaker 1>the US Court of Appeals for the d C Circuit,

0:15:02.200 --> 0:15:05.120
<v Speaker 1>which deals with a lot of the most significant cases

0:15:05.160 --> 0:15:08.840
<v Speaker 1>involving federal regulation. And throughout his time on that court,

0:15:08.920 --> 0:15:12.040
<v Speaker 1>we've seen him of an influence on the Supreme Court

0:15:12.080 --> 0:15:15.280
<v Speaker 1>in terms of what cases the Supreme Court takes and

0:15:15.600 --> 0:15:18.560
<v Speaker 1>how the Supreme Court evaluates those sorts of issues. And

0:15:18.600 --> 0:15:20.880
<v Speaker 1>so my view is that if he had that sort

0:15:20.920 --> 0:15:24.360
<v Speaker 1>of influence on the Supreme Court before he reached reached

0:15:24.360 --> 0:15:27.200
<v Speaker 1>that court, we should expect him to be even more

0:15:27.200 --> 0:15:30.200
<v Speaker 1>influential now that he's not down the street but actually

0:15:30.280 --> 0:15:34.000
<v Speaker 1>across the conference table. Some breaking news, Google says they're

0:15:34.080 --> 0:15:38.080
<v Speaker 1>shutting down Google Plus for consumers. On this blog, Google

0:15:38.120 --> 0:15:40.120
<v Speaker 1>shares are down two percent on the news that it's

0:15:40.160 --> 0:15:45.200
<v Speaker 1>shutting down Google Plus for consumers. Jonathan, though he was

0:15:45.800 --> 0:15:48.080
<v Speaker 1>very influential in the cases that came to the court,

0:15:48.240 --> 0:15:51.320
<v Speaker 1>might the Court step back a little bit from taking

0:15:51.960 --> 0:15:54.520
<v Speaker 1>cases that are going to end up likely in a

0:15:54.560 --> 0:15:57.520
<v Speaker 1>five four split for a while in order to try

0:15:57.560 --> 0:16:01.760
<v Speaker 1>to repair the damage that's been done to its image. Well,

0:16:01.800 --> 0:16:04.680
<v Speaker 1>I think certainly the Chief Justice, as we know, like

0:16:04.960 --> 0:16:08.480
<v Speaker 1>to keep the Court out of high profile political disputes

0:16:08.760 --> 0:16:11.680
<v Speaker 1>when he can. I think also, whenever you have a

0:16:11.680 --> 0:16:15.800
<v Speaker 1>new justice, it takes some time before the justices get

0:16:15.840 --> 0:16:19.480
<v Speaker 1>a good sense of how the new justice is going

0:16:19.520 --> 0:16:23.120
<v Speaker 1>to evaluate cases. And I think that it always tends

0:16:23.200 --> 0:16:27.400
<v Speaker 1>to make the Court a little more reluctant to take

0:16:27.480 --> 0:16:32.000
<v Speaker 1>new cases. And I think the political fight over Kavano's

0:16:32.000 --> 0:16:36.120
<v Speaker 1>nomination and the wounds that it created will only magnify

0:16:36.360 --> 0:16:39.440
<v Speaker 1>that normal tendency to move a little slowly when you

0:16:39.520 --> 0:16:43.760
<v Speaker 1>have changes in the courts personnel. We were speaking earlier

0:16:43.760 --> 0:16:48.160
<v Speaker 1>in the program about President Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder,

0:16:49.040 --> 0:16:52.840
<v Speaker 1>questioning the legitimacy of the court given all that's happened

0:16:52.920 --> 0:16:56.560
<v Speaker 1>leading up to this, Does the Court need to tread

0:16:56.680 --> 0:17:01.360
<v Speaker 1>lightly to regain the country's trust. Well, I think if

0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:04.439
<v Speaker 1>the Court just sticks to what it normally does, that

0:17:04.600 --> 0:17:07.720
<v Speaker 1>over time, I mean, people will will realize that the

0:17:07.720 --> 0:17:10.399
<v Speaker 1>Court is going to continue to decide the sorts of

0:17:10.440 --> 0:17:13.280
<v Speaker 1>cases that has always decided. Most of what the Court

0:17:13.400 --> 0:17:15.639
<v Speaker 1>does is not the sort of thing that makes the

0:17:15.720 --> 0:17:17.399
<v Speaker 1>front page of the New York Times. Most of what

0:17:17.480 --> 0:17:21.280
<v Speaker 1>it does is provide clarity and consistency to various aspects

0:17:21.280 --> 0:17:24.879
<v Speaker 1>of federal law, about rules that that relate to the

0:17:24.920 --> 0:17:28.400
<v Speaker 1>regulation of business, the handling of various types of litigation,

0:17:28.400 --> 0:17:31.640
<v Speaker 1>and so on, and uh that that sort of work

0:17:31.720 --> 0:17:34.440
<v Speaker 1>is going to continue, and I think will will reassure

0:17:34.440 --> 0:17:37.640
<v Speaker 1>folks at the Court is still very much the type

0:17:37.680 --> 0:17:40.320
<v Speaker 1>of court that we've we've come to down. Clarence Thomas

0:17:40.320 --> 0:17:42.560
<v Speaker 1>said in his memoirs that he used to wear a

0:17:42.600 --> 0:17:48.480
<v Speaker 1>bulletproof vest and those days are behind him. But Brett Kavanaugh,

0:17:48.680 --> 0:17:52.720
<v Speaker 1>in his his confirmation was even more contentious, and he

0:17:52.800 --> 0:17:55.960
<v Speaker 1>went outside the typical role of the Supreme Court nominee

0:17:55.960 --> 0:17:59.080
<v Speaker 1>in several ways with the Fox TV interview, the Wall

0:17:59.119 --> 0:18:03.080
<v Speaker 1>Street Journal editorial. So might it be more difficult for

0:18:03.160 --> 0:18:08.160
<v Speaker 1>him to overcome any preconceptions the public has. Well, it's

0:18:08.160 --> 0:18:11.119
<v Speaker 1>certainly understandable that that some portion of the public is

0:18:11.160 --> 0:18:13.879
<v Speaker 1>going to be skeptical of Justice Kavanaugh for some time,

0:18:14.480 --> 0:18:17.640
<v Speaker 1>and he certainly should be aware of that. In terms

0:18:17.680 --> 0:18:20.840
<v Speaker 1>of thinking about public appearances and the like, what sorts

0:18:20.880 --> 0:18:23.879
<v Speaker 1>of speeches he gives. I think it would make sense

0:18:24.119 --> 0:18:26.760
<v Speaker 1>for him to be aware that that, at least for

0:18:26.880 --> 0:18:29.800
<v Speaker 1>a time, he's going to remain a devisive figure. I

0:18:29.800 --> 0:18:33.119
<v Speaker 1>would think and certainly hope that he at some point

0:18:33.160 --> 0:18:36.760
<v Speaker 1>in the near future takes an opportunity to acknowledge and

0:18:36.880 --> 0:18:40.680
<v Speaker 1>reflect on the nomination process and acknowledge his own part,

0:18:40.760 --> 0:18:44.919
<v Speaker 1>particularly at that one hearing in in feeding the rancor,

0:18:45.000 --> 0:18:47.600
<v Speaker 1>and the partisanship of this process. Can you give this

0:18:47.680 --> 0:18:50.120
<v Speaker 1>a little color on what it's likely to be like

0:18:50.640 --> 0:18:55.159
<v Speaker 1>the first time that Kavanaugh takes his place in the

0:18:55.200 --> 0:18:57.679
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court. Well, he'll be he he will be on

0:18:57.720 --> 0:19:00.800
<v Speaker 1>the bench tomorrow, I believe when the court uh, here's

0:19:00.800 --> 0:19:04.120
<v Speaker 1>the oral argument and and um, you know, I think

0:19:04.119 --> 0:19:05.639
<v Speaker 1>you know he will be at the end because the

0:19:06.080 --> 0:19:09.600
<v Speaker 1>justice sit in order of seniority, with the Chief in

0:19:09.640 --> 0:19:12.600
<v Speaker 1>the middle and then alternating on either side. So he

0:19:12.640 --> 0:19:15.480
<v Speaker 1>will be at a at the far end of the court. Um.

0:19:16.040 --> 0:19:17.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't think the justices are going to treat him

0:19:17.720 --> 0:19:20.520
<v Speaker 1>any differently. Um. Four of the justices in addition to

0:19:20.560 --> 0:19:24.240
<v Speaker 1>the Chief, were at his swearing in on Saturday, including

0:19:24.640 --> 0:19:29.160
<v Speaker 1>Justice Kagan and Ginsburg Um. But I do think there

0:19:29.200 --> 0:19:31.160
<v Speaker 1>will be quite a bit of attention the first time

0:19:31.200 --> 0:19:33.719
<v Speaker 1>he asks a question. I think a lot of us

0:19:33.720 --> 0:19:37.000
<v Speaker 1>are wondering whether he will be as aggressive uh at

0:19:37.119 --> 0:19:40.760
<v Speaker 1>oral argument as Justice Course, which was during his first term.

0:19:40.800 --> 0:19:43.960
<v Speaker 1>And Um coming up is going to be the Court

0:19:44.040 --> 0:19:49.879
<v Speaker 1>considering overturning the separate sovereign's doctrine. Where might his his

0:19:50.440 --> 0:19:53.640
<v Speaker 1>inclinations lie in that kind of a case. I think

0:19:53.640 --> 0:19:56.359
<v Speaker 1>that that's a particularly hard case to judge for for

0:19:56.440 --> 0:19:59.400
<v Speaker 1>a bunch of reasons, one of which is um. While

0:19:59.520 --> 0:20:02.760
<v Speaker 1>Medici Circus he dealt a lot with questions of federal regulation,

0:20:03.119 --> 0:20:06.040
<v Speaker 1>he didn't deal nearly so much with either questions of

0:20:06.040 --> 0:20:10.080
<v Speaker 1>criminal law or with the issues of federalism. Because DC

0:20:10.320 --> 0:20:12.879
<v Speaker 1>is not a state. The sort of federalism concerns that

0:20:12.920 --> 0:20:16.240
<v Speaker 1>come up, for example, in this dual sovereignty case relating

0:20:16.240 --> 0:20:19.760
<v Speaker 1>to double jeopardy didn't really emerge. So on some of

0:20:19.800 --> 0:20:21.520
<v Speaker 1>those sorts of issues, I think we really have a

0:20:21.560 --> 0:20:24.360
<v Speaker 1>hard time and can only speculate about how he might

0:20:24.359 --> 0:20:28.239
<v Speaker 1>approach them. Would you say the cases coming up on

0:20:28.359 --> 0:20:31.720
<v Speaker 1>sexual orientation and gender identity would be some of the

0:20:31.760 --> 0:20:35.159
<v Speaker 1>most closely watched just ahead. UM, well, certainly when the

0:20:35.240 --> 0:20:36.879
<v Speaker 1>when the Court starts to take some of those cases.

0:20:36.920 --> 0:20:38.919
<v Speaker 1>I think those would be very closely watched. There are

0:20:38.960 --> 0:20:42.359
<v Speaker 1>some cases relating to affirmative action relating to abortion that

0:20:42.400 --> 0:20:45.280
<v Speaker 1>are working their way up in the lower courts. Um.

0:20:45.359 --> 0:20:49.000
<v Speaker 1>There are some very important regulatory cases relating to climate

0:20:49.040 --> 0:20:53.040
<v Speaker 1>change regulation or two uh the f SECS regulation that

0:20:53.160 --> 0:20:55.240
<v Speaker 1>that also would be worth watching if they make the court.

0:20:55.920 --> 0:20:58.760
<v Speaker 1>Thanks to Jonathan Adler, Professor at Case Western Reserve of

0:20:58.840 --> 0:21:01.240
<v Speaker 1>University School of Law and director of the Center for

0:21:01.359 --> 0:21:05.000
<v Speaker 1>Business Law and Regulation. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg

0:21:05.080 --> 0:21:08.160
<v Speaker 1>Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen to the show

0:21:08.200 --> 0:21:12.879
<v Speaker 1>on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast.

0:21:13.280 --> 0:21:16.040
<v Speaker 1>I'm June Brosso. This is Bloomberg