1
00:00:03,160 --> 00:00:09,600
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio. Today,

2
00:00:09,840 --> 00:00:13,079
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice, joined by eight states, file a

3
00:00:13,160 --> 00:00:16,799
Speaker 1: civil antitrust lawsuit in the United States District Court for

4
00:00:16,880 --> 00:00:21,320
Speaker 1: the Eastern District of Virginia against Google. Attorney General Merrick

5
00:00:21,360 --> 00:00:25,279
Speaker 1: Garland announced on Tuesday that the Justice Department is suing

6
00:00:25,360 --> 00:00:30,040
Speaker 1: Google for antitrust violations, accusing the search giant of using

7
00:00:30,080 --> 00:00:33,920
Speaker 1: its dominant position in the online ad industry to box

8
00:00:33,960 --> 00:00:39,400
Speaker 1: out competitors. Google has engaged an exclusionary conductor, severely weakened,

9
00:00:39,440 --> 00:00:43,880
Speaker 1: if not destroy competition in the ad tech industry. It's

10
00:00:43,880 --> 00:00:47,440
Speaker 1: a high stakes attempt to break up Google's ad tech business,

11
00:00:47,680 --> 00:00:50,080
Speaker 1: one of the few times the government has called for

12
00:00:50,159 --> 00:00:54,240
Speaker 1: the breakup of a major company. In response, Google said

13
00:00:54,280 --> 00:00:57,360
Speaker 1: the lawsuit attempts to pick winners and losers in the

14
00:00:57,480 --> 00:01:02,520
Speaker 1: highly competitive advertising technology sector. Joining me is Bloomberg Intelligence.

15
00:01:02,520 --> 00:01:06,320
Speaker 1: Senior litigation analyst Jennifer ree Gent tell us a little

16
00:01:06,360 --> 00:01:10,479
Speaker 1: about the government's case against Google. So, the government's case

17
00:01:10,600 --> 00:01:13,720
Speaker 1: is actually very much like an ongoing case that's already

18
00:01:13,720 --> 00:01:16,080
Speaker 1: been in litigation for a couple of years now, that

19
00:01:16,240 --> 00:01:19,160
Speaker 1: was brought by a group of states led by Texas,

20
00:01:19,200 --> 00:01:21,880
Speaker 1: and both of these losses cover what they call the

21
00:01:21,880 --> 00:01:24,960
Speaker 1: ad text stack, and the ad tex stack is a

22
00:01:25,000 --> 00:01:29,319
Speaker 1: series of products that are used basically by advertisers and

23
00:01:29,400 --> 00:01:34,200
Speaker 1: by publishers for placing advertisements online. When somebody opens up

24
00:01:34,200 --> 00:01:36,479
Speaker 1: a website, you know, we don't know what. We opened

25
00:01:36,480 --> 00:01:39,400
Speaker 1: a website and we see all these advertisements, but there's

26
00:01:39,480 --> 00:01:43,160
Speaker 1: this complex series of transactions that happen to place that

27
00:01:43,440 --> 00:01:45,760
Speaker 1: ad there and to figure out what add to place

28
00:01:45,840 --> 00:01:48,920
Speaker 1: depending on who the user is. And there are tools

29
00:01:48,920 --> 00:01:51,440
Speaker 1: on the publishers side and their tools on the advertiser

30
00:01:51,520 --> 00:01:53,960
Speaker 1: side that they use, and then there's an exchange where

31
00:01:53,960 --> 00:01:56,960
Speaker 1: they kind of come together to auction on the space

32
00:01:57,080 --> 00:01:59,720
Speaker 1: and the ads that are available. And so the allegation

33
00:01:59,800 --> 00:02:03,200
Speaker 1: here is that Google has slowly bought in to each

34
00:02:03,240 --> 00:02:06,400
Speaker 1: of these tools all the way across that chain and

35
00:02:06,480 --> 00:02:09,079
Speaker 1: at this point have dominance, you know, all the way

36
00:02:09,120 --> 00:02:12,560
Speaker 1: across from publisher to advertiser. And they did it by

37
00:02:12,600 --> 00:02:16,040
Speaker 1: buying products and then also by engaging an anti competitive

38
00:02:16,080 --> 00:02:18,399
Speaker 1: conduct that kind of blocked out the rivals that were

39
00:02:18,400 --> 00:02:20,919
Speaker 1: out there that we're able to compete, and they now

40
00:02:20,960 --> 00:02:25,160
Speaker 1: have dominance across this whole chain of products the complaints says,

41
00:02:25,400 --> 00:02:27,720
Speaker 1: and this was from the words of one of Google's

42
00:02:27,760 --> 00:02:31,600
Speaker 1: own advertising executives. The analogy would be of Goldman or

43
00:02:31,680 --> 00:02:35,640
Speaker 1: City Bank owned the New York stock ege change. Right exactly,

44
00:02:35,720 --> 00:02:38,360
Speaker 1: it looks like a very big conflict of interest on

45
00:02:38,440 --> 00:02:41,639
Speaker 1: its face. You know, they have both ends. They can

46
00:02:41,680 --> 00:02:44,880
Speaker 1: control everything that occurs, and they have dominance in each

47
00:02:44,960 --> 00:02:48,520
Speaker 1: piece of it. Right, so they can affect where these

48
00:02:48,560 --> 00:02:52,239
Speaker 1: ads go. They can preference in themselves because they themselves

49
00:02:52,280 --> 00:02:55,000
Speaker 1: have ad space and our advertisers, and then they can

50
00:02:55,040 --> 00:02:57,840
Speaker 1: also extract a lot of money out of advertisers and

51
00:02:57,880 --> 00:03:01,400
Speaker 1: publishers because they don't really have of competition. And if

52
00:03:01,400 --> 00:03:04,200
Speaker 1: these publishers and advertisers want to meet up and place

53
00:03:04,280 --> 00:03:06,799
Speaker 1: these ads in the best places, and the publishers want

54
00:03:06,800 --> 00:03:09,200
Speaker 1: to sell their space, they have to use these Google tools.

55
00:03:09,520 --> 00:03:12,200
Speaker 1: Have no choice but to pay these high fees. Essentially,

56
00:03:13,240 --> 00:03:16,360
Speaker 1: so Google has argued different times that its ad business

57
00:03:16,480 --> 00:03:20,919
Speaker 1: is not a monopoly because it has to compete with Meta, Amazon,

58
00:03:21,520 --> 00:03:25,840
Speaker 1: Comcast and others, and its share of the digital ad

59
00:03:25,880 --> 00:03:30,240
Speaker 1: revenue market has dropped from thirty six point seven percent

60
00:03:30,360 --> 00:03:34,920
Speaker 1: in sixteen to eight point eight percent last year, according

61
00:03:34,960 --> 00:03:38,840
Speaker 1: to Insider intelligence. So does that show that there is

62
00:03:38,880 --> 00:03:43,840
Speaker 1: some competition? Well, that is Google sort of characterizing things

63
00:03:44,000 --> 00:03:47,560
Speaker 1: differently than the Department of Justices and the States are.

64
00:03:47,840 --> 00:03:51,600
Speaker 1: You know, they're looking generally and broadly at advertising on

65
00:03:51,680 --> 00:03:54,920
Speaker 1: the Internet, but what the Department of Justice is looking

66
00:03:54,920 --> 00:03:57,560
Speaker 1: at is something that's much more narrow you know, they're

67
00:03:57,600 --> 00:04:01,640
Speaker 1: looking specifically at each tool that's you by advertisers and

68
00:04:01,680 --> 00:04:05,920
Speaker 1: publishers to place advertisements on space on websites. And so

69
00:04:06,040 --> 00:04:08,800
Speaker 1: you have to take out, let's say, a Facebook, because

70
00:04:08,840 --> 00:04:12,280
Speaker 1: Facebook operates its own wall system. So in other words,

71
00:04:12,320 --> 00:04:16,480
Speaker 1: if there's an ad exchange tool that auctions on ads

72
00:04:16,480 --> 00:04:19,120
Speaker 1: that Facebook is not involved in, that Facebook isn't a

73
00:04:19,120 --> 00:04:24,080
Speaker 1: competitor there. Facebook is negotiating itself with advertisers for placement

74
00:04:24,440 --> 00:04:28,440
Speaker 1: on its own website, et cetera. So it's not in there.

75
00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:31,320
Speaker 1: It may be a place where an advertiser can go

76
00:04:31,880 --> 00:04:37,000
Speaker 1: right online to advertise and it has space for those advertisements,

77
00:04:37,000 --> 00:04:40,080
Speaker 1: but it's not competing with the Google products that are

78
00:04:40,200 --> 00:04:43,000
Speaker 1: at issue in the complaints. So, you know, while Google

79
00:04:43,080 --> 00:04:45,800
Speaker 1: may not be wrong about those assertions, they're just looking

80
00:04:45,800 --> 00:04:49,440
Speaker 1: at the market differently than the Department of Justices. This

81
00:04:49,600 --> 00:04:53,279
Speaker 1: was mentioned that the press conference, the a G was asked,

82
00:04:53,320 --> 00:04:56,240
Speaker 1: why are you duplicating this lawsuit by the Texas a

83
00:04:56,320 --> 00:04:59,320
Speaker 1: Journey General and other states? So why are they duplicating

84
00:04:59,560 --> 00:05:02,200
Speaker 1: that happens a lot, doesn't it. It does, yeah, And

85
00:05:02,240 --> 00:05:04,000
Speaker 1: I would say there are a couple of different reasons

86
00:05:04,000 --> 00:05:05,720
Speaker 1: for it. I mean, the first reason is that they

87
00:05:05,720 --> 00:05:08,360
Speaker 1: are an anti trust enforcer, and it doesn't mean they're

88
00:05:08,400 --> 00:05:11,240
Speaker 1: going to sit back and rely on some other plaintiff

89
00:05:11,279 --> 00:05:13,360
Speaker 1: to bring their case when they think that there's been

90
00:05:13,520 --> 00:05:16,479
Speaker 1: anti competitive conduct. They're going to bring their own case.

91
00:05:16,800 --> 00:05:19,680
Speaker 1: They have their own evidence, they've done a long investigation,

92
00:05:19,839 --> 00:05:22,719
Speaker 1: and they want to pursue that enforcement and not rely

93
00:05:22,839 --> 00:05:25,360
Speaker 1: on somebody else. But I actually think there also might

94
00:05:25,400 --> 00:05:29,000
Speaker 1: be another reason. The states, unlike the Department of Justice,

95
00:05:29,040 --> 00:05:32,840
Speaker 1: are subject to consolidation of lawsuits where there are other

96
00:05:32,920 --> 00:05:36,360
Speaker 1: similar lawsuits. And in the case of the the suit

97
00:05:36,440 --> 00:05:39,599
Speaker 1: that was brought by Texas, they were consolidated with other

98
00:05:39,720 --> 00:05:42,480
Speaker 1: lawsuits over the exact same thing that are broad as

99
00:05:42,520 --> 00:05:46,080
Speaker 1: consumer class actions, one by advertisers and one by publishers,

100
00:05:46,360 --> 00:05:49,000
Speaker 1: and they got consolidated and moved to a New York court,

101
00:05:49,279 --> 00:05:52,720
Speaker 1: and by virtue of that, they were slowed down immensely.

102
00:05:53,000 --> 00:05:56,599
Speaker 1: I mean even for litigation June. That litigation is going

103
00:05:56,640 --> 00:06:00,359
Speaker 1: at a glacial pace. It's complex, there are lot of

104
00:06:00,400 --> 00:06:04,120
Speaker 1: issues there, the judges taking it in tranches and in stages,

105
00:06:04,160 --> 00:06:06,839
Speaker 1: and you're looking at a matter that probably I doubt

106
00:06:06,880 --> 00:06:10,120
Speaker 1: would get to trial any time before two thousand twenty five.

107
00:06:10,520 --> 00:06:12,640
Speaker 1: On the other hand, the Department of Justice doesn't have

108
00:06:12,680 --> 00:06:14,960
Speaker 1: to consolidate. It can stay where it brought it suit

109
00:06:15,000 --> 00:06:18,599
Speaker 1: in Virginia, and I suspect could probably get to trial

110
00:06:18,680 --> 00:06:22,719
Speaker 1: on this before that other case gets to trial. This

111
00:06:22,920 --> 00:06:26,400
Speaker 1: is one of the few times that the Justice Department

112
00:06:26,400 --> 00:06:30,080
Speaker 1: has called for the breakup of a major company since

113
00:06:30,080 --> 00:06:34,960
Speaker 1: it dismantled Bell in the nine eighties. Why do you

114
00:06:35,000 --> 00:06:37,920
Speaker 1: think they're doing that here? Well, I think if they

115
00:06:38,080 --> 00:06:43,360
Speaker 1: view anti competitive conduct to start at anti competitive purchases.

116
00:06:44,040 --> 00:06:48,080
Speaker 1: In other words, Google tried to compete and couldn't and

117
00:06:48,160 --> 00:06:51,880
Speaker 1: instead went out and started buying up competitors and sort

118
00:06:51,880 --> 00:06:54,400
Speaker 1: of hoovering up all of the different products that were

119
00:06:54,440 --> 00:06:56,680
Speaker 1: in the space in order to dominate it. That that

120
00:06:56,880 --> 00:06:59,920
Speaker 1: in itself, that the acquisition activity in and of its

121
00:07:00,000 --> 00:07:03,080
Speaker 1: health is part of the anti competitive conduct here. And

122
00:07:03,120 --> 00:07:05,440
Speaker 1: if that is the case, then the remedy to seek

123
00:07:05,640 --> 00:07:09,920
Speaker 1: is to sell off some of these illegally acquired technologies.

124
00:07:10,160 --> 00:07:12,320
Speaker 1: You know, it would be different if if a company

125
00:07:12,400 --> 00:07:15,880
Speaker 1: was bought for pro competitive reasons, let's say, but once

126
00:07:15,920 --> 00:07:19,080
Speaker 1: it was bought, the company developed into a monopoly which

127
00:07:19,080 --> 00:07:23,720
Speaker 1: wouldn't be illegal, but then behave badly and engaged in

128
00:07:23,800 --> 00:07:28,000
Speaker 1: an exclusionary tactics with that monopoly to then keep out rivals.

129
00:07:28,080 --> 00:07:30,880
Speaker 1: I think that's a little bit different. But here they

130
00:07:30,920 --> 00:07:35,200
Speaker 1: say just buying Double Click, let's say, and add mobs

131
00:07:35,200 --> 00:07:37,360
Speaker 1: and some of the other pieces of this puzzle that

132
00:07:37,400 --> 00:07:41,280
Speaker 1: they bought. Those in itself were anti competitive, maybe should

133
00:07:41,280 --> 00:07:43,920
Speaker 1: have been stopped by the agency at the time of

134
00:07:44,000 --> 00:07:46,920
Speaker 1: the acquisition, but wererant, and now we need to seek

135
00:07:46,960 --> 00:07:49,120
Speaker 1: to have them sold off. It's it's very much like

136
00:07:49,520 --> 00:07:53,400
Speaker 1: the FTC's lawsuit against Facebook right now, where it's seeking

137
00:07:53,600 --> 00:07:56,960
Speaker 1: the divestiture of either WhatsApp or Instagram or both. This

138
00:07:57,160 --> 00:08:02,760
Speaker 1: represents the Biden administration's first major case challenging one of

139
00:08:02,800 --> 00:08:06,560
Speaker 1: the largest tech companies, and Attorney General Garland said, no

140
00:08:06,600 --> 00:08:09,960
Speaker 1: matter the industry, no matter the company, the Justice Department

141
00:08:09,960 --> 00:08:14,800
Speaker 1: will vigorously enforce our antitrust laws. How important is this

142
00:08:14,920 --> 00:08:20,480
Speaker 1: lawsuit to the Justice Department. I think it's quite important.

143
00:08:20,600 --> 00:08:24,200
Speaker 1: I would say also that it's existing lawsuit against Alphabet

144
00:08:24,760 --> 00:08:27,840
Speaker 1: related to Google Search, which it brought a few years

145
00:08:27,840 --> 00:08:30,800
Speaker 1: ago and will go to trial in September of this year,

146
00:08:30,840 --> 00:08:33,680
Speaker 1: at least it's set to at this moment. It's also

147
00:08:33,880 --> 00:08:37,319
Speaker 1: very important. I mean, they very much mirror the really

148
00:08:37,400 --> 00:08:43,040
Speaker 1: huge sort of seminal antitrust monopolization antitrust case against Microsoft,

149
00:08:43,120 --> 00:08:47,520
Speaker 1: which was generally successful. And I think they're very important

150
00:08:47,559 --> 00:08:50,520
Speaker 1: cases because since Microsoft, there has been very few big

151
00:08:50,559 --> 00:08:54,280
Speaker 1: monopolization suits brought either by the SEC or the Department

152
00:08:54,280 --> 00:08:57,400
Speaker 1: of Justice. I think critics would say that they pretty

153
00:08:57,480 --> 00:09:00,320
Speaker 1: much just dropped that kind of enforcement. And we have

154
00:09:00,360 --> 00:09:02,880
Speaker 1: a problem now because for the last ten years, the

155
00:09:03,080 --> 00:09:05,800
Speaker 1: FTC and d OJ have sat around and allowed these

156
00:09:05,800 --> 00:09:08,800
Speaker 1: big tech platforms just to buy up the industries that

157
00:09:08,880 --> 00:09:11,480
Speaker 1: they're in, just buy up small competitors right and left,

158
00:09:11,760 --> 00:09:14,520
Speaker 1: to rise to a position of dominance and now need

159
00:09:14,600 --> 00:09:16,720
Speaker 1: to do something about it. And I think that's what

160
00:09:16,760 --> 00:09:18,960
Speaker 1: they're trying to do here now with this Google case

161
00:09:19,000 --> 00:09:22,160
Speaker 1: and also the one that they're pursuing over Google Search,

162
00:09:22,200 --> 00:09:24,520
Speaker 1: and I think they're very important cases for them. Yeah,

163
00:09:24,600 --> 00:09:28,200
Speaker 1: I think they really tried to pump up this case

164
00:09:28,320 --> 00:09:31,800
Speaker 1: at the press conference called it a landmark case, and

165
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:36,200
Speaker 1: also Vanita Gupta, the Associated Tourney General, went through a

166
00:09:36,280 --> 00:09:40,600
Speaker 1: list of the different accomplishments in antitrust that the Justice

167
00:09:40,640 --> 00:09:45,840
Speaker 1: Department has their you know, the Biden administrations, So right right, yeah,

168
00:09:45,920 --> 00:09:48,400
Speaker 1: And I think that's somewhat in response to a July

169
00:09:48,840 --> 00:09:50,920
Speaker 1: I guess it was now in two thousand twenty one

170
00:09:50,960 --> 00:09:54,720
Speaker 1: executive order by President Biden that basically encouraged all of

171
00:09:54,760 --> 00:09:58,280
Speaker 1: the agencies in the federal government to sort of ramp

172
00:09:58,360 --> 00:10:02,080
Speaker 1: up to try to in prease competition in the marketplace.

173
00:10:02,280 --> 00:10:04,520
Speaker 1: And so they're basically saying, look, that's what we've done.

174
00:10:04,520 --> 00:10:07,920
Speaker 1: We're responding to your executive order. We're working really hard.

175
00:10:08,200 --> 00:10:10,760
Speaker 1: We've accomplished a lot to try to you know, follow

176
00:10:10,760 --> 00:10:13,560
Speaker 1: our mission and ramp up competition in the marketplace, and

177
00:10:13,600 --> 00:10:15,600
Speaker 1: this is a big piece of it. And I think

178
00:10:15,640 --> 00:10:18,280
Speaker 1: this is an important case too, because it will be

179
00:10:18,320 --> 00:10:21,200
Speaker 1: incredibly difficult for them to actually win and achieve a

180
00:10:21,200 --> 00:10:24,000
Speaker 1: breakup order here. You know, they came close to it

181
00:10:24,040 --> 00:10:28,000
Speaker 1: with Microsoft, but that was overturned on appeal, and the

182
00:10:28,040 --> 00:10:31,559
Speaker 1: Department of Justice ultimately settled. Pieces of the liability portion

183
00:10:31,600 --> 00:10:34,480
Speaker 1: were overturned on appeal, and then the appellate court urged

184
00:10:34,559 --> 00:10:37,480
Speaker 1: them to rethink what the remedy was because the disrecord

185
00:10:37,600 --> 00:10:40,440
Speaker 1: did say the breakup was the appropriate remedy, and then

186
00:10:40,480 --> 00:10:44,080
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice ended up settling with Microsoft. But

187
00:10:44,320 --> 00:10:47,400
Speaker 1: many think that the settlement was actually quite useful and

188
00:10:47,480 --> 00:10:51,000
Speaker 1: did increase competition in the marketplace, and so this is

189
00:10:51,160 --> 00:10:54,240
Speaker 1: a big risk. They are taking a stab, they're trying again.

190
00:10:54,640 --> 00:10:56,760
Speaker 1: I think their goal will be to try to force

191
00:10:56,800 --> 00:10:59,320
Speaker 1: Google to type into some of these products. Do you

192
00:10:59,360 --> 00:11:02,120
Speaker 1: think that this will actually go to trial or there'll

193
00:11:02,160 --> 00:11:05,120
Speaker 1: be a settlement? You know, it's so early to predict

194
00:11:05,160 --> 00:11:08,680
Speaker 1: something like that because oftentimes settlements come about because of

195
00:11:08,760 --> 00:11:11,600
Speaker 1: the direction that the litigation is going in, you know,

196
00:11:11,679 --> 00:11:14,400
Speaker 1: reading the chord, reading some of the conferences, And we

197
00:11:14,440 --> 00:11:17,000
Speaker 1: haven't gotten anywhere near there yet with just a complaint.

198
00:11:17,240 --> 00:11:19,439
Speaker 1: You know. My guess is that the Department of Justice

199
00:11:19,480 --> 00:11:22,280
Speaker 1: is very interested in trying this case, and I think

200
00:11:22,400 --> 00:11:25,000
Speaker 1: at least for now, unless they see they get a

201
00:11:25,080 --> 00:11:27,880
Speaker 1: very hostile judge. For now, it would be hard to

202
00:11:27,880 --> 00:11:30,040
Speaker 1: see how they'd reach a settlement because I'm not sure

203
00:11:30,080 --> 00:11:32,320
Speaker 1: that DJ would want any kind of a settlement that's

204
00:11:32,360 --> 00:11:35,040
Speaker 1: short of some divestment, and I really doubt Google would

205
00:11:35,040 --> 00:11:38,199
Speaker 1: agree to that. Jen. Let's turn now to another antitrust

206
00:11:38,320 --> 00:11:42,560
Speaker 1: issue that online ticket buyers shouldn't be able to relate to.

207
00:11:44,200 --> 00:11:50,120
Speaker 1: That's such a fast Taylor Swift fans known as Swifties

208
00:11:50,480 --> 00:11:53,839
Speaker 1: rallied outside the US capital on Tuesday as the Senate

209
00:11:53,920 --> 00:11:57,559
Speaker 1: Judiciary Committee held a hearing about what went wrong during

210
00:11:57,559 --> 00:12:01,240
Speaker 1: the pre sale for Swift tickets late less year. Millions

211
00:12:01,240 --> 00:12:05,080
Speaker 1: of fans were left in virtual queues or denied tickets altogether,

212
00:12:05,320 --> 00:12:08,240
Speaker 1: and Ticketmaster had to shut down the pre sale. There

213
00:12:08,240 --> 00:12:11,360
Speaker 1: were complaints that the murder of Live Nation and events

214
00:12:11,400 --> 00:12:16,000
Speaker 1: company with Ticketmaster means that it controls event production as

215
00:12:16,040 --> 00:12:19,640
Speaker 1: well as ticket sales. Here's Jack Rotzinger, the CEO of

216
00:12:19,679 --> 00:12:23,440
Speaker 1: seat geek Arrival ticket platform. It is no mystery why

217
00:12:23,480 --> 00:12:26,600
Speaker 1: no other company has significantly penetrated the primary ticketing market.

218
00:12:26,720 --> 00:12:29,839
Speaker 1: Major venues in the US know that if they move

219
00:12:29,920 --> 00:12:33,400
Speaker 1: their primary ticketing business from Ticketmaster, they risk losing revenue

220
00:12:33,400 --> 00:12:36,199
Speaker 1: they earned from Live Nation concerts. But the president and

221
00:12:36,400 --> 00:12:40,640
Speaker 1: CFO of Live Nation, Joe Burke, told blamed bots who

222
00:12:40,679 --> 00:12:44,400
Speaker 1: buy up tickets in large quantities for the pre sale fiasco.

223
00:12:44,880 --> 00:12:47,600
Speaker 1: We knew bots would attack that on sale and planned accordingly.

224
00:12:48,400 --> 00:12:50,800
Speaker 1: We were then hit with three times the amount of

225
00:12:50,840 --> 00:12:53,920
Speaker 1: bot traffic that we'd ever experienced, and for the first

226
00:12:53,960 --> 00:12:56,920
Speaker 1: time in four hundred verified fan on sales, they came

227
00:12:56,960 --> 00:13:01,040
Speaker 1: after our verified fan pass password servers as wealth Jen

228
00:13:01,120 --> 00:13:03,439
Speaker 1: give us the background here. You know, there have been

229
00:13:03,440 --> 00:13:06,360
Speaker 1: complaints about Live Nation for years, I mean essentially ever

230
00:13:06,440 --> 00:13:10,600
Speaker 1: since Live Nation acquired Ticketmaster, which vertically integrated the company.

231
00:13:10,679 --> 00:13:13,040
Speaker 1: It was a promoter and now was also a ticket

232
00:13:13,080 --> 00:13:16,240
Speaker 1: seller and across the board, there have been complaints about

233
00:13:16,280 --> 00:13:19,760
Speaker 1: abuse of that position. And at the time that Live

234
00:13:19,840 --> 00:13:22,760
Speaker 1: Nation acquire Ticketmaster, it did enter into a consent order

235
00:13:23,040 --> 00:13:26,720
Speaker 1: basically promising to behave barely and not to discriminate against

236
00:13:26,760 --> 00:13:29,800
Speaker 1: other ticket sellers that are selling tickets for concerts and

237
00:13:29,840 --> 00:13:32,720
Speaker 1: events that it's promoting. Well, the Department of Justice loan

238
00:13:32,800 --> 00:13:35,760
Speaker 1: Behold found a bit it wasn't abiding by those terms,

239
00:13:35,800 --> 00:13:38,080
Speaker 1: and when after Live Nation just a couple of years ago,

240
00:13:38,120 --> 00:13:41,280
Speaker 1: again saying hey, you violated these terms, and what they

241
00:13:41,320 --> 00:13:43,600
Speaker 1: did is they extended a consent order and they kind

242
00:13:43,640 --> 00:13:46,120
Speaker 1: of beefed up some of the terms, and now people

243
00:13:46,120 --> 00:13:49,280
Speaker 1: are saying, hey, they're still not abiding by these terms.

244
00:13:49,320 --> 00:13:51,599
Speaker 1: And the problem at the core of it was you

245
00:13:51,800 --> 00:13:55,000
Speaker 1: the determat of Justice allowed Live Nation to buy Ticketmaster,

246
00:13:55,160 --> 00:13:57,640
Speaker 1: and that's just a big conflict of interest and it's

247
00:13:57,800 --> 00:14:01,800
Speaker 1: really harms and forecloses other bival ticket sellers, and that's

248
00:14:01,800 --> 00:14:04,520
Speaker 1: a problem. And there was this big snap who was

249
00:14:04,640 --> 00:14:08,240
Speaker 1: selling Taylor Swift tickets for her upcoming tour, and a

250
00:14:08,240 --> 00:14:11,280
Speaker 1: lot of people say, hey, that's because there's no competition

251
00:14:11,640 --> 00:14:14,319
Speaker 1: and the systems aren't good enough. Because Live Nation they

252
00:14:14,360 --> 00:14:16,800
Speaker 1: have no incentive to innovate, they have no incentive to

253
00:14:16,800 --> 00:14:19,280
Speaker 1: try to keep thoughts out, they have no incentive to

254
00:14:19,320 --> 00:14:22,960
Speaker 1: have the best quality technology here, so this process can

255
00:14:23,000 --> 00:14:26,440
Speaker 1: go smoothly. So this is just an example of why

256
00:14:26,480 --> 00:14:29,680
Speaker 1: their dominance is a bad thing. Is the Justice Department

257
00:14:29,680 --> 00:14:33,160
Speaker 1: doing anything about this? Now? We do understand from news

258
00:14:33,320 --> 00:14:36,800
Speaker 1: that the d o J has still another investigation at

259
00:14:36,840 --> 00:14:39,920
Speaker 1: this point of Live Nation ongoing, and that that had

260
00:14:39,960 --> 00:14:43,160
Speaker 1: started before the whole Taylor Swift fiasco. But you know,

261
00:14:43,360 --> 00:14:46,400
Speaker 1: Congress is upset about this too. So the Senate Judiciary

262
00:14:46,400 --> 00:14:49,360
Speaker 1: Committee at hearing and brought in quite a few people

263
00:14:49,400 --> 00:14:52,720
Speaker 1: to testify one from Live Nation, as the rest were

264
00:14:52,760 --> 00:14:57,240
Speaker 1: all various people involved in the industry, promoters, actually somebody

265
00:14:57,240 --> 00:15:00,080
Speaker 1: from a band was there speaking about the troubles the

266
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:02,360
Speaker 1: they have in the small piece of the ticket price

267
00:15:02,400 --> 00:15:04,640
Speaker 1: that they actually get, because I think they want to

268
00:15:04,680 --> 00:15:07,920
Speaker 1: draw attention to this. What can Congress do besides the

269
00:15:08,040 --> 00:15:11,560
Speaker 1: whole hearings? I mean, Congress can't really do very much,

270
00:15:12,080 --> 00:15:14,440
Speaker 1: but at least what these hearings do is bring out

271
00:15:14,520 --> 00:15:17,520
Speaker 1: information that's useful for the Department of Justice and then

272
00:15:17,560 --> 00:15:21,040
Speaker 1: also um validates what the Department of Justice is doing

273
00:15:21,080 --> 00:15:24,880
Speaker 1: if they continue to pursue the investigation and then ultimately

274
00:15:24,920 --> 00:15:27,640
Speaker 1: decided to bring a lawsuit because June, I think at

275
00:15:27,640 --> 00:15:30,880
Speaker 1: this point they have already failed to abide by the

276
00:15:30,920 --> 00:15:33,880
Speaker 1: consent order one. If it's found that they failed to

277
00:15:33,920 --> 00:15:36,280
Speaker 1: abide by those terms a second time, I don't think

278
00:15:36,320 --> 00:15:38,480
Speaker 1: there's going to be a third chance. The third chance

279
00:15:38,520 --> 00:15:41,800
Speaker 1: will be a lawsuit, and that lawsuit, given this Department

280
00:15:41,800 --> 00:15:44,920
Speaker 1: of Justice, could be yet another one where they seek

281
00:15:44,960 --> 00:15:47,200
Speaker 1: the breakup of a company. They could seek to force

282
00:15:47,200 --> 00:15:49,920
Speaker 1: them to sell ticket Master. I think anyone who's tried

283
00:15:49,960 --> 00:15:52,440
Speaker 1: to buy tickets online and get stuck in one of

284
00:15:52,480 --> 00:15:57,400
Speaker 1: those cues can relate to this absolutely. Thanks so much, Jen.

285
00:15:58,000 --> 00:16:01,800
Speaker 1: That's Bloomberg Intelligence seen you litigate Ation analyst Jennifer Ree

286
00:16:01,840 --> 00:16:04,760
Speaker 1: coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show. The Supreme

287
00:16:04,800 --> 00:16:08,320
Speaker 1: Court's first decision of the term is a blow to veterans.

288
00:16:08,560 --> 00:16:12,600
Speaker 1: I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. Texas is

289
00:16:12,680 --> 00:16:17,680
Speaker 1: leading another lawsuit against the Biden administration over immigration policy.

290
00:16:17,840 --> 00:16:21,200
Speaker 1: Texas and twenty other Republican led states are suing over

291
00:16:21,400 --> 00:16:25,119
Speaker 1: change in immigration policy that would turn away more migrants

292
00:16:25,200 --> 00:16:29,000
Speaker 1: but still allow three hundred sixty thousand people to legally

293
00:16:29,240 --> 00:16:33,640
Speaker 1: enter each year from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. The

294
00:16:33,720 --> 00:16:38,800
Speaker 1: lawsuit accuses the Biden administration of arbitrarily creating recent changes

295
00:16:39,080 --> 00:16:43,200
Speaker 1: and overstepping its authority. Joining me is immigration law expert

296
00:16:43,320 --> 00:16:46,880
Speaker 1: Leon Fresco, a partner at Holland and Knight. Leon, We've

297
00:16:46,920 --> 00:16:50,280
Speaker 1: talked about this parole program before, but why don't you

298
00:16:50,280 --> 00:16:53,120
Speaker 1: give us a little recap of what it is. So

299
00:16:53,240 --> 00:16:57,280
Speaker 1: the Biden administration decided recently that because the border has

300
00:16:57,320 --> 00:17:00,440
Speaker 1: become very very difficult command in that they would employ

301
00:17:00,520 --> 00:17:04,480
Speaker 1: a new carrots and take approach to the border. The

302
00:17:04,640 --> 00:17:09,000
Speaker 1: sixth part being that if you try to enter illegally

303
00:17:09,320 --> 00:17:11,680
Speaker 1: in between the ports of entry, meaning you try to

304
00:17:11,720 --> 00:17:15,399
Speaker 1: cross the border illegally, what would happen to that person

305
00:17:16,040 --> 00:17:18,800
Speaker 1: is they would immediately be subject to Title forty two

306
00:17:18,800 --> 00:17:25,000
Speaker 1: expulsion from the United States. But because that approach was

307
00:17:25,160 --> 00:17:28,800
Speaker 1: being draconian by a lot of the folks on the

308
00:17:28,840 --> 00:17:31,280
Speaker 1: Democratic side of the aisle, the idea is it would

309
00:17:31,280 --> 00:17:34,879
Speaker 1: be combined with carrots, which is this parole program, which

310
00:17:34,960 --> 00:17:38,000
Speaker 1: was to say, look, we're going to allow about three

311
00:17:38,760 --> 00:17:41,760
Speaker 1: thousand people per years, thirty thousand people per months to

312
00:17:41,880 --> 00:17:45,199
Speaker 1: come in legally from the basic four countries where we're

313
00:17:45,200 --> 00:17:48,320
Speaker 1: getting a lot of the traffic right now, Cuba, Nicaragua,

314
00:17:48,440 --> 00:17:52,400
Speaker 1: Venezuela and eighty and that way. It's times that we're

315
00:17:52,400 --> 00:17:55,119
Speaker 1: rejecting everybody, but we're asking them to come through this

316
00:17:55,240 --> 00:17:59,200
Speaker 1: legal manner that lessons the burden on our courts of entry.

317
00:17:59,520 --> 00:18:04,320
Speaker 1: So now the State of Texas and others are suing

318
00:18:04,440 --> 00:18:07,159
Speaker 1: over this program, and they say it's you know, the

319
00:18:07,200 --> 00:18:11,440
Speaker 1: administration has created a kind of visa program without approval

320
00:18:11,480 --> 00:18:14,960
Speaker 1: from Congress, without legislation. Tell us more about the suit.

321
00:18:15,600 --> 00:18:19,080
Speaker 1: So the lawsuit is basically saying that the way the

322
00:18:19,240 --> 00:18:22,600
Speaker 1: parole authority works. And what parole is is it some

323
00:18:22,680 --> 00:18:27,040
Speaker 1: authority that Congress has conferred upon the President of the

324
00:18:27,119 --> 00:18:30,800
Speaker 1: United States, whoever president at that time, to admit any

325
00:18:30,880 --> 00:18:35,200
Speaker 1: foreign naginal if there is what's either called a compelling

326
00:18:35,320 --> 00:18:40,000
Speaker 1: humanitarian interest or a significant public benefit for letting that

327
00:18:40,080 --> 00:18:43,840
Speaker 1: person in. So in the history of the United States,

328
00:18:44,200 --> 00:18:47,760
Speaker 1: this program had been used many times for programmatic purposes

329
00:18:47,760 --> 00:18:52,480
Speaker 1: with Cubans, with Vietnam, Cambodia, during the Vietnam War. It

330
00:18:52,560 --> 00:18:55,560
Speaker 1: has been used many many times. But in the nighties,

331
00:18:56,280 --> 00:18:59,360
Speaker 1: that program got substituted with what we now know as

332
00:18:59,400 --> 00:19:03,399
Speaker 1: the refuge keep program. So the refugee program is the

333
00:19:03,480 --> 00:19:07,880
Speaker 1: program that Congress intends the president's use on an annual

334
00:19:08,040 --> 00:19:11,639
Speaker 1: plan basis to say, we're gonna take this many refugees

335
00:19:11,640 --> 00:19:14,520
Speaker 1: from this place, as many from this place, etcetera. And

336
00:19:14,560 --> 00:19:18,199
Speaker 1: what parole is is this a program that was changed

337
00:19:18,480 --> 00:19:21,840
Speaker 1: so it would be just for one person at a time. So,

338
00:19:21,960 --> 00:19:28,760
Speaker 1: for instance, somebody is having cancer treatment and the the

339
00:19:28,760 --> 00:19:32,200
Speaker 1: their mother has been denied visas for you know, because

340
00:19:32,200 --> 00:19:34,840
Speaker 1: they think the mother is gonna immigrate to the United States,

341
00:19:34,840 --> 00:19:37,400
Speaker 1: so they can't get a visitor visa. But now they say, look,

342
00:19:37,400 --> 00:19:39,560
Speaker 1: I need my mother in because I'm dying, and police

343
00:19:39,600 --> 00:19:42,560
Speaker 1: letter of visiting while hunting cancer treatment or something, and

344
00:19:42,760 --> 00:19:45,199
Speaker 1: you would parole the mother into the United States in

345
00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:49,000
Speaker 1: that situation. Things like that. And so the point that

346
00:19:49,080 --> 00:19:52,040
Speaker 1: the States are making is you have to keep that

347
00:19:52,160 --> 00:19:54,399
Speaker 1: on a one on one basis that you can't create

348
00:19:54,440 --> 00:19:58,400
Speaker 1: a memo that basically creates a criteria where people who

349
00:19:58,440 --> 00:20:01,320
Speaker 1: meet that criteria would be able to apply for a

350
00:20:01,320 --> 00:20:05,560
Speaker 1: parole program. They think that exceeds the bounds of what

351
00:20:05,720 --> 00:20:09,680
Speaker 1: Congress created in this new parole framework in the center.

352
00:20:10,440 --> 00:20:13,480
Speaker 1: Does it sound like they're right, because it sounds like

353
00:20:14,040 --> 00:20:17,800
Speaker 1: something that Congress should be involved in. I think the

354
00:20:17,920 --> 00:20:21,560
Speaker 1: issue is going to be twofold. So number one, I

355
00:20:21,600 --> 00:20:25,919
Speaker 1: think ordinarily you would have a very close on this

356
00:20:26,520 --> 00:20:29,280
Speaker 1: because the argument that the Biden administration is going to

357
00:20:29,400 --> 00:20:33,040
Speaker 1: make is, well, this is a significant public benefit to

358
00:20:33,040 --> 00:20:35,200
Speaker 1: do a program like this, because we have two million

359
00:20:35,240 --> 00:20:38,159
Speaker 1: people crossing our border and if we can end that

360
00:20:38,320 --> 00:20:41,200
Speaker 1: by creating a legal flows to site and this off,

361
00:20:41,760 --> 00:20:44,480
Speaker 1: that's gonna be a massive victory brawl of us. So

362
00:20:44,520 --> 00:20:47,159
Speaker 1: they're gonna try to make that argument. The question is

363
00:20:47,160 --> 00:20:49,800
Speaker 1: going to be how differential the court will be, and

364
00:20:49,880 --> 00:20:52,280
Speaker 1: the court have not been very differential in the last

365
00:20:52,320 --> 00:20:56,440
Speaker 1: few years to the president. So that's gonna be one problem.

366
00:20:56,760 --> 00:20:59,440
Speaker 1: But the second problem is this new and I'm sure

367
00:20:59,720 --> 00:21:02,000
Speaker 1: you keep talking about it on your show, People keep

368
00:21:02,040 --> 00:21:05,920
Speaker 1: talking about it. That made your questions doctrine that came

369
00:21:05,920 --> 00:21:10,880
Speaker 1: out recently in the Supreme Court from the climate change cases,

370
00:21:11,080 --> 00:21:14,359
Speaker 1: which is basically saying, look, whatever there's any major change

371
00:21:14,960 --> 00:21:18,720
Speaker 1: that don't be an administrative action. Then the question is

372
00:21:18,760 --> 00:21:22,760
Speaker 1: that Congress explicitly allow you to do that, And so

373
00:21:22,840 --> 00:21:25,320
Speaker 1: that's going to be sort of another issue that may

374
00:21:25,359 --> 00:21:27,520
Speaker 1: come up here that may make it harder for the

375
00:21:27,560 --> 00:21:29,920
Speaker 1: administration to win long serve. I do think it will

376
00:21:29,920 --> 00:21:33,640
Speaker 1: be enjoined very quickly at the district court level, because

377
00:21:34,040 --> 00:21:36,320
Speaker 1: you know, they filed it in a location that tends

378
00:21:36,359 --> 00:21:38,879
Speaker 1: to lead towards that, and I do think the Fifth

379
00:21:38,880 --> 00:21:42,240
Speaker 1: Circuit will probably keep the programming joined. And then the

380
00:21:42,320 --> 00:21:46,080
Speaker 1: question is will the Supreme Court allow this program to

381
00:21:46,160 --> 00:21:51,280
Speaker 1: actually get implemented. All indications are when it was used

382
00:21:51,280 --> 00:21:54,280
Speaker 1: with the Ukrainians is that the program does help at

383
00:21:54,320 --> 00:21:58,320
Speaker 1: the border. So is Texas suing you think just to

384
00:21:58,520 --> 00:22:05,480
Speaker 1: sue or I mean, this is sort of the sixty

385
00:22:05,520 --> 00:22:09,120
Speaker 1: four thousand dollar question, which is looks there are certainly

386
00:22:09,200 --> 00:22:13,760
Speaker 1: some arguments that can be made on the inflammatory side

387
00:22:13,800 --> 00:22:15,760
Speaker 1: about well, why did you sue when we did this

388
00:22:15,840 --> 00:22:20,240
Speaker 1: for Ukrainians? Are you suggesting something about that you were

389
00:22:20,280 --> 00:22:23,000
Speaker 1: okay with it with one psycho population and you're not

390
00:22:23,119 --> 00:22:26,480
Speaker 1: okay with it with another type of population. There's certainly

391
00:22:26,600 --> 00:22:30,520
Speaker 1: arguments that people will raise at regard and there's other

392
00:22:30,640 --> 00:22:33,360
Speaker 1: arguments about, hey, look, why are the States suing? Are

393
00:22:33,359 --> 00:22:37,399
Speaker 1: they cutting up their nose despite their face, Because since

394
00:22:37,480 --> 00:22:40,840
Speaker 1: we know these programs of a track record of success

395
00:22:40,880 --> 00:22:44,200
Speaker 1: of channeling people toward legal immigration and getting them off

396
00:22:44,240 --> 00:22:48,280
Speaker 1: the border, why would they sue? Those are fair questions

397
00:22:48,280 --> 00:22:51,200
Speaker 1: and criticism. You know, I'm not here to launch them

398
00:22:51,240 --> 00:22:53,199
Speaker 1: or not launched them, just to introduce them to your

399
00:22:53,280 --> 00:22:56,680
Speaker 1: viewers and let them make their decisions. And so it's

400
00:22:56,760 --> 00:23:00,679
Speaker 1: unclear policy wise why this would be object stitutins they

401
00:23:00,720 --> 00:23:05,440
Speaker 1: would relieve pressure on the Texas border. But nevertheless they're

402
00:23:05,520 --> 00:23:08,960
Speaker 1: just trying to say perhaps that even if this is

403
00:23:09,000 --> 00:23:13,639
Speaker 1: relieving pressure, they just object to three hundred and sixty

404
00:23:13,640 --> 00:23:16,320
Speaker 1: thou people being allowed legally into the United States that

405
00:23:16,359 --> 00:23:19,560
Speaker 1: wouldn't have been allowed legally, you know a few months ago.

406
00:23:19,920 --> 00:23:22,960
Speaker 1: Let me ask you about one allegation. They say it

407
00:23:23,080 --> 00:23:29,439
Speaker 1: unlawfully creates a de facto pathway to citizenship. Doesn't do that. Well,

408
00:23:29,640 --> 00:23:32,480
Speaker 1: what happens is it could in sort of a rude

409
00:23:32,520 --> 00:23:35,600
Speaker 1: gold bird imagination for a few of the people in

410
00:23:35,640 --> 00:23:37,199
Speaker 1: the program. And you might say, well, what do I

411
00:23:37,240 --> 00:23:41,120
Speaker 1: mean by this? Well, what happens is there's a lot

412
00:23:41,200 --> 00:23:44,040
Speaker 1: of people who if they don't have an entry way

413
00:23:44,160 --> 00:23:49,080
Speaker 1: into the United States, then they can't get a green card.

414
00:23:49,240 --> 00:23:51,920
Speaker 1: So if you cross the border illegally, you can't get

415
00:23:51,920 --> 00:23:53,920
Speaker 1: a green card, even if you marry a U S

416
00:23:53,960 --> 00:23:57,239
Speaker 1: c isen or you have some other citizen relative like

417
00:23:57,280 --> 00:24:00,320
Speaker 1: a sibling or a parent that could petition for you.

418
00:24:00,920 --> 00:24:04,240
Speaker 1: But if there are people who need these circumstances, that

419
00:24:04,320 --> 00:24:07,159
Speaker 1: they have a relative that is able to petition for

420
00:24:07,240 --> 00:24:10,840
Speaker 1: them under a normal green card system, and the only

421
00:24:10,920 --> 00:24:14,240
Speaker 1: barrier to entry so far has been that they can't

422
00:24:14,280 --> 00:24:18,119
Speaker 1: get parolled into the United States, then this parole in

423
00:24:18,240 --> 00:24:21,520
Speaker 1: that small subset of cases could lead to a past

424
00:24:21,560 --> 00:24:23,919
Speaker 1: to citizenship. But it's not going to be all the

425
00:24:23,960 --> 00:24:26,800
Speaker 1: three hundred and sixty thousand people, but there will be

426
00:24:26,880 --> 00:24:29,560
Speaker 1: some number. I don't know what the percentage will be

427
00:24:30,119 --> 00:24:34,720
Speaker 1: that would become Green card holders and eventually US citizens

428
00:24:34,760 --> 00:24:38,320
Speaker 1: because of this program that wouldn't have otherwise had that.

429
00:24:38,560 --> 00:24:41,400
Speaker 1: So is that number gonna be one? I think it'll

430
00:24:41,440 --> 00:24:44,280
Speaker 1: be more than one. Will it be all three hundred thousand?

431
00:24:44,320 --> 00:24:46,240
Speaker 1: I think it'll be much less than that, but it

432
00:24:46,280 --> 00:24:49,159
Speaker 1: will be some number in between. And the question is,

433
00:24:49,200 --> 00:24:50,960
Speaker 1: you know, and people are going to talk about public

434
00:24:51,000 --> 00:24:53,680
Speaker 1: benefits and other things like that to try to get

435
00:24:53,760 --> 00:24:56,879
Speaker 1: standing in the court. Then the question is is that

436
00:24:56,920 --> 00:25:00,040
Speaker 1: all too speculative for the courts to take into a

437
00:25:00,119 --> 00:25:03,880
Speaker 1: count or can the court take into account this kind

438
00:25:03,920 --> 00:25:07,359
Speaker 1: of thing where there's a probability you can easily make

439
00:25:07,440 --> 00:25:10,680
Speaker 1: the causal link, but you have no way to predict

440
00:25:11,119 --> 00:25:14,440
Speaker 1: how many people will be in this group. I want

441
00:25:14,440 --> 00:25:18,280
Speaker 1: to turn to another immigration issue, and that's there are

442
00:25:18,280 --> 00:25:23,119
Speaker 1: these mass tech layoffs and it's leaving hundreds of workers

443
00:25:23,280 --> 00:25:26,199
Speaker 1: or maybe more that are living in the US on

444
00:25:26,359 --> 00:25:30,480
Speaker 1: the H one B visas scrambling for jobs. Explain the

445
00:25:30,640 --> 00:25:34,439
Speaker 1: H one B visa. The H one B visa is

446
00:25:34,480 --> 00:25:38,840
Speaker 1: the primary visa mechanism for skilled workers to enter the

447
00:25:38,920 --> 00:25:42,320
Speaker 1: United States to work if they copped visa. So there's

448
00:25:42,320 --> 00:25:46,760
Speaker 1: only sixty five thousand per year, plus additional twenty thousand

449
00:25:46,840 --> 00:25:49,399
Speaker 1: for people with master's degree. And so there's always a

450
00:25:49,440 --> 00:25:51,920
Speaker 1: lottery there, you hear, because there's about five hundred thousand

451
00:25:52,000 --> 00:25:55,399
Speaker 1: people who want the visas and only about eighty five thousand,

452
00:25:55,480 --> 00:25:57,800
Speaker 1: as I said, get them in total. And so what

453
00:25:57,880 --> 00:25:59,760
Speaker 1: happens is that you win the off me and you

454
00:25:59,800 --> 00:26:03,840
Speaker 1: get sezzas. You have to work in a skilled occupation

455
00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:06,919
Speaker 1: for an employer who is giving you this kind of

456
00:26:06,920 --> 00:26:11,280
Speaker 1: skilled work. And they are visas that last or two

457
00:26:11,480 --> 00:26:13,879
Speaker 1: terms of three years. So the most you can be

458
00:26:13,960 --> 00:26:18,040
Speaker 1: on H one B status is six years total and

459
00:26:18,119 --> 00:26:21,679
Speaker 1: then you either have to go home or an employer

460
00:26:22,040 --> 00:26:25,120
Speaker 1: as the petition for you for a Green card, which

461
00:26:25,160 --> 00:26:29,800
Speaker 1: then extend your say until that green card adjudication continue

462
00:26:30,000 --> 00:26:32,919
Speaker 1: or is decided. And so now one of the problems

463
00:26:33,040 --> 00:26:36,280
Speaker 1: is that people are on the visas to work at

464
00:26:36,280 --> 00:26:39,440
Speaker 1: these tech companies, and even worse, if you're from India,

465
00:26:39,840 --> 00:26:42,840
Speaker 1: the problem is you could be in a backlog waiting

466
00:26:42,840 --> 00:26:46,000
Speaker 1: for a green card for up to thirty forty years.

467
00:26:46,040 --> 00:26:49,000
Speaker 1: Because the way our green card system works is that

468
00:26:49,040 --> 00:26:52,000
Speaker 1: we don't have a first come, first served green card system.

469
00:26:52,320 --> 00:26:55,440
Speaker 1: We divide it up for country, and so we say,

470
00:26:55,520 --> 00:26:58,320
Speaker 1: of all the green card plots, people from one country

471
00:26:58,359 --> 00:27:01,280
Speaker 1: can only get seven person and of the plot. And

472
00:27:01,359 --> 00:27:04,600
Speaker 1: so India, which has one point four billion people, is

473
00:27:04,680 --> 00:27:09,640
Speaker 1: limited to the same fourteen thousand green cards employment plots

474
00:27:09,680 --> 00:27:13,200
Speaker 1: that Monaco is limited too. And so from that same point,

475
00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:17,680
Speaker 1: the Indians have long, long line. And so if they

476
00:27:17,720 --> 00:27:22,840
Speaker 1: get laid off anywhere in this forty year line, suddenly

477
00:27:22,880 --> 00:27:26,400
Speaker 1: they lose their sadus, their spouse loses their sabbus, their kids,

478
00:27:26,400 --> 00:27:30,439
Speaker 1: blues their status and it becomes this humanitarian nightmare. So

479
00:27:30,840 --> 00:27:34,320
Speaker 1: they have only sixty days to find another job. Is

480
00:27:34,359 --> 00:27:38,400
Speaker 1: that a firm? Sixty days? So here's what happens. When

481
00:27:38,440 --> 00:27:40,480
Speaker 1: you are an eight one B visa and you lose

482
00:27:40,520 --> 00:27:44,359
Speaker 1: your job, another employer can position for you if you

483
00:27:44,480 --> 00:27:49,320
Speaker 1: meet the criteria to also have h one sabbus as

484
00:27:49,359 --> 00:27:52,480
Speaker 1: bad employer. Now it has to get approved at the

485
00:27:52,520 --> 00:27:55,280
Speaker 1: end of the day. In order for you to say so,

486
00:27:55,359 --> 00:27:57,600
Speaker 1: they'll have to show that this is a legitimate employer

487
00:27:57,840 --> 00:28:00,920
Speaker 1: giving you legitimate skills, work at or on. And so

488
00:28:00,960 --> 00:28:03,800
Speaker 1: if it gets approved, then you're fine. Then your problem

489
00:28:03,840 --> 00:28:07,160
Speaker 1: has been solved. If it does not get approved, then

490
00:28:07,200 --> 00:28:09,560
Speaker 1: the question is, well, what is the administration gonna do.

491
00:28:10,359 --> 00:28:13,639
Speaker 1: Is it going to just allow people to remain here illegally?

492
00:28:14,119 --> 00:28:16,960
Speaker 1: Is it gonna get people some other status, like the

493
00:28:17,080 --> 00:28:20,560
Speaker 1: third action for them to remain here, and then perhaps

494
00:28:20,760 --> 00:28:23,160
Speaker 1: if they can find an eighth one B job later

495
00:28:23,880 --> 00:28:28,800
Speaker 1: retroactively approve it's called nuke pro tunk approval, so that

496
00:28:28,960 --> 00:28:31,919
Speaker 1: the approval goes back to where if it had been

497
00:28:31,920 --> 00:28:35,040
Speaker 1: approved prior to that, they could have kept their status.

498
00:28:35,040 --> 00:28:37,840
Speaker 1: They have that discretion to do that, and so all

499
00:28:37,880 --> 00:28:42,040
Speaker 1: of those decisions are being debated in the administration. But

500
00:28:42,680 --> 00:28:46,720
Speaker 1: that's the issue. And then you know, people may decide,

501
00:28:46,760 --> 00:28:50,000
Speaker 1: because this is a totally different group than the group

502
00:28:50,080 --> 00:28:52,719
Speaker 1: that comes without status, that they don't want to live

503
00:28:52,760 --> 00:28:55,640
Speaker 1: in the United States without status. But that's too scary,

504
00:28:55,760 --> 00:28:57,840
Speaker 1: too uncertain. They don't want to drive it out a

505
00:28:57,920 --> 00:29:00,640
Speaker 1: driver's license, because that's not what the folk for doing,

506
00:29:00,680 --> 00:29:03,560
Speaker 1: you folk for making hundreds of thousands of dollars. They

507
00:29:03,560 --> 00:29:07,479
Speaker 1: had drivers licenses, they had you know, bank accounts and

508
00:29:07,720 --> 00:29:10,720
Speaker 1: houses and things like this. And that group may not

509
00:29:10,840 --> 00:29:15,200
Speaker 1: want to live even one day undocumented in the United States.

510
00:29:15,360 --> 00:29:17,320
Speaker 1: And so what happened there is you could see a

511
00:29:17,320 --> 00:29:20,600
Speaker 1: lot of people selling their house or moving to Canada,

512
00:29:20,760 --> 00:29:23,320
Speaker 1: or you know, doing something like that in that situation.

513
00:29:23,400 --> 00:29:26,760
Speaker 1: And so if this problem becomes a protracted problem where

514
00:29:26,760 --> 00:29:30,080
Speaker 1: people really can't change employers, you might start seeing some

515
00:29:30,200 --> 00:29:33,440
Speaker 1: of that behavior. Just to take the personal element out

516
00:29:33,440 --> 00:29:37,560
Speaker 1: of it for a moment. The reason for these visas

517
00:29:37,600 --> 00:29:41,000
Speaker 1: are that it's supposed to be a program that fills

518
00:29:41,520 --> 00:29:43,920
Speaker 1: an area where there's a shortage of Americans to work

519
00:29:44,000 --> 00:29:47,440
Speaker 1: science technology. But now that there have been all these

520
00:29:47,520 --> 00:29:50,960
Speaker 1: layoffs and a lot of Americans are laid off, should

521
00:29:50,960 --> 00:29:55,560
Speaker 1: this program be an effect at the numbers that it is. Well, so,

522
00:29:55,720 --> 00:29:58,760
Speaker 1: this is a very interesting point about which VISA does want.

523
00:29:59,040 --> 00:30:03,000
Speaker 1: So the ployment based green card has a test where

524
00:30:03,000 --> 00:30:05,520
Speaker 1: you have to show an American worker is not available

525
00:30:05,960 --> 00:30:08,760
Speaker 1: in order to get that green card. The H one

526
00:30:08,800 --> 00:30:11,920
Speaker 1: dvs are actually doesn't have that test. The employer is

527
00:30:11,960 --> 00:30:15,560
Speaker 1: not required to prove that American worker couldn't be found

528
00:30:16,040 --> 00:30:18,680
Speaker 1: before they hire a foreign worker. They just have to

529
00:30:18,760 --> 00:30:21,200
Speaker 1: prove that the foreign worker is getting all of the

530
00:30:21,240 --> 00:30:24,600
Speaker 1: same weight as a benefit that an American would be

531
00:30:24,640 --> 00:30:28,560
Speaker 1: paid for that job. The other interesting point is that

532
00:30:28,720 --> 00:30:32,640
Speaker 1: even though these layoffs are occurring, they're occurring within a

533
00:30:32,720 --> 00:30:38,320
Speaker 1: backdrop of relatively low unemployment for skill docupations. And so

534
00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:41,680
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, right now, at least

535
00:30:41,800 --> 00:30:44,880
Speaker 1: anecdotally from my world of clients, but also for the

536
00:30:44,880 --> 00:30:48,120
Speaker 1: people I talkt to a a lot of the layoffs

537
00:30:48,200 --> 00:30:52,719
Speaker 1: that are occurring are this first much more toward the

538
00:30:52,760 --> 00:30:55,720
Speaker 1: group that's not really the eighth one beholding group. There

539
00:30:55,720 --> 00:30:58,880
Speaker 1: are some people being laid off, but not in large number.

540
00:30:59,000 --> 00:31:02,400
Speaker 1: But even to the those folks are being laid off

541
00:31:02,880 --> 00:31:05,320
Speaker 1: at the moment, there are other places for them to

542
00:31:05,400 --> 00:31:09,200
Speaker 1: go because of the low unemployment rate in the skilled workforce.

543
00:31:09,600 --> 00:31:12,960
Speaker 1: If this problem were to start to pick up where

544
00:31:12,960 --> 00:31:16,640
Speaker 1: if actually we're seeing an inversion from what we have now.

545
00:31:16,720 --> 00:31:19,720
Speaker 1: Right now we have more job openings and unemployed people

546
00:31:19,760 --> 00:31:23,200
Speaker 1: in these skill in sectors. But if it inverts where

547
00:31:23,200 --> 00:31:25,880
Speaker 1: you start having more unemployment and less job opening and

548
00:31:25,960 --> 00:31:30,040
Speaker 1: the skills suctors, then the kinds of concerns you're talking

549
00:31:30,040 --> 00:31:34,520
Speaker 1: about certainly can be raised. And look, that's why during

550
00:31:34,560 --> 00:31:39,160
Speaker 1: the Trump administration, he actually during the COVID period said

551
00:31:39,200 --> 00:31:42,200
Speaker 1: this and put a travel ban on H one B

552
00:31:42,360 --> 00:31:44,600
Speaker 1: holders and said no more h want to be visa

553
00:31:44,760 --> 00:31:48,080
Speaker 1: to be issued there in COVID because we ate COVID,

554
00:31:48,480 --> 00:31:51,920
Speaker 1: but be we're worried about the economic loss of jobs

555
00:31:51,960 --> 00:31:54,320
Speaker 1: that now set the signs to let people in. Would

556
00:31:54,360 --> 00:31:58,000
Speaker 1: god Biden administration ever do this? Probably not, but it's

557
00:31:58,000 --> 00:32:01,280
Speaker 1: certainly a tool that now President Trump has used. It

558
00:32:01,720 --> 00:32:04,480
Speaker 1: has raised the possibility that any president could use it

559
00:32:04,640 --> 00:32:08,680
Speaker 1: in a situation like this. And employers who want to

560
00:32:08,920 --> 00:32:12,520
Speaker 1: hire an H one B VISA holder it costs more

561
00:32:12,840 --> 00:32:16,200
Speaker 1: than hiring a US citizen for the job. Well, so

562
00:32:16,280 --> 00:32:19,200
Speaker 1: here's the question. There's a lot of criticism on that end. Well,

563
00:32:19,240 --> 00:32:23,120
Speaker 1: maybe employers are only hiring for IT workers to save wages,

564
00:32:23,680 --> 00:32:26,440
Speaker 1: but forgetting about what it costs right now. But right

565
00:32:26,480 --> 00:32:31,000
Speaker 1: now it costs in fees. It costs about five thousand

566
00:32:31,000 --> 00:32:34,760
Speaker 1: dollars just in government to filing fees who hire an

567
00:32:34,880 --> 00:32:37,560
Speaker 1: H one B worker. And that's not even paying a

568
00:32:37,640 --> 00:32:40,440
Speaker 1: lawyer yet, So you know, it could be between sixteen

569
00:32:40,480 --> 00:32:43,680
Speaker 1: and twenty thousand dollars right now. U s c i

570
00:32:43,920 --> 00:32:47,280
Speaker 1: s is basically doubling that amount upcoming with their new

571
00:32:47,320 --> 00:32:51,240
Speaker 1: fee rules. So if they end up big thirty thousand

572
00:32:51,280 --> 00:32:54,680
Speaker 1: dollars to bring in an h one B worker into

573
00:32:54,720 --> 00:32:57,040
Speaker 1: the United States. When this is all said and done,

574
00:32:57,280 --> 00:32:59,400
Speaker 1: you know, when this new fee schedule gets put in

575
00:32:59,560 --> 00:33:02,160
Speaker 1: very so and so the idea that you'd hire an

576
00:33:02,160 --> 00:33:05,640
Speaker 1: ant to be to undercut an American starts to become

577
00:33:05,800 --> 00:33:10,400
Speaker 1: much more unsubstantiated at that kind of feed level. And

578
00:33:10,480 --> 00:33:15,680
Speaker 1: what you really see happening is employers basically doing what

579
00:33:15,920 --> 00:33:20,080
Speaker 1: the National Basketball Association or the National Hockey League is doing,

580
00:33:20,160 --> 00:33:22,320
Speaker 1: which is what they're just saying is, look, we don't

581
00:33:22,360 --> 00:33:26,080
Speaker 1: view this marketplace as America or global or anything else.

582
00:33:26,200 --> 00:33:30,520
Speaker 1: Just we want the best people. And if we've determined

583
00:33:30,560 --> 00:33:32,680
Speaker 1: that X person is the best person, but they don't

584
00:33:32,720 --> 00:33:35,440
Speaker 1: happen to be a US citizen, we just want to

585
00:33:35,440 --> 00:33:38,520
Speaker 1: bring them in, period. And it's not really viewed by

586
00:33:38,560 --> 00:33:42,360
Speaker 1: the way didsue. It's more viewed by them just deciding

587
00:33:42,440 --> 00:33:44,760
Speaker 1: that they want to bring in X or Y person

588
00:33:44,840 --> 00:33:47,640
Speaker 1: because that's the person they want on their feet. And

589
00:33:47,720 --> 00:33:50,280
Speaker 1: some of these workers are making a hundred thousand, two

590
00:33:50,320 --> 00:33:53,640
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars. There are some people making six hundred

591
00:33:53,640 --> 00:33:57,160
Speaker 1: thousand dollars on h mbps. It just depends what type

592
00:33:57,200 --> 00:33:59,720
Speaker 1: of work they're doing and then what type of companies,

593
00:34:00,200 --> 00:34:02,720
Speaker 1: and there's a lot of folks that were making even

594
00:34:02,760 --> 00:34:05,120
Speaker 1: that kind of money. That's not the average, but but

595
00:34:05,200 --> 00:34:08,080
Speaker 1: I certainly know of some clients making that amount of money.

596
00:34:08,360 --> 00:34:11,480
Speaker 1: And what it just comes down to is the marketplace

597
00:34:12,120 --> 00:34:15,680
Speaker 1: and employers in a lot of these markets, they've become

598
00:34:16,200 --> 00:34:20,560
Speaker 1: very talent sensitive, just like affortunately give. So you want

599
00:34:20,560 --> 00:34:23,120
Speaker 1: that top level of talent because it could actually makes

600
00:34:23,120 --> 00:34:27,960
Speaker 1: the difference between a product being more successful and less successful.

601
00:34:28,160 --> 00:34:30,399
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for being on the show. Leon. That's

602
00:34:30,440 --> 00:34:33,960
Speaker 1: immigration law expert Leon Fresco, a partner at Hollanden Knight.

603
00:34:34,360 --> 00:34:36,640
Speaker 1: And that's it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show.

604
00:34:37,000 --> 00:34:39,480
Speaker 1: Remember you can always get the latest legal news, honor

605
00:34:39,520 --> 00:34:43,840
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

606
00:34:43,880 --> 00:34:48,919
Speaker 1: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, slash Law,

607
00:34:49,320 --> 00:34:51,920
Speaker 1: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every

608
00:34:51,960 --> 00:34:55,440
Speaker 1: week night at ten BM Wall Street Time. I'm June

609
00:34:55,440 --> 00:35:00,359
Speaker 1: Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg One