1
00:00:03,200 --> 00:00:08,000
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:09,320 --> 00:00:13,640
Speaker 2: I'm going to make sure that every single justice up

3
00:00:13,640 --> 00:00:17,800
Speaker 2: in that court knows we are here, we are watching,

4
00:00:18,120 --> 00:00:21,800
Speaker 2: and we demand that they put our lives over the

5
00:00:21,840 --> 00:00:23,360
Speaker 2: interests of the gun lobby.

6
00:00:23,600 --> 00:00:27,440
Speaker 3: Hundreds of protesters were outside the Supreme Court on Tuesday

7
00:00:27,720 --> 00:00:31,720
Speaker 3: to support the federal ban on domestic abusers having guns,

8
00:00:32,080 --> 00:00:36,400
Speaker 3: and inside, the justices seem to agree, suggesting during oral

9
00:00:36,520 --> 00:00:39,560
Speaker 3: arguments that they'll preserve the ban and it didn't even

10
00:00:39,600 --> 00:00:43,479
Speaker 3: seem like a hard issue. Both liberals and conservatives sounded

11
00:00:43,520 --> 00:00:46,440
Speaker 3: persuaded that the ban is in line with the long

12
00:00:46,520 --> 00:00:51,680
Speaker 3: standing practice of disarming dangerous people, and the defendant undoubtedly

13
00:00:51,720 --> 00:00:55,800
Speaker 3: fit in that category. Here's Chief Justice John Roberts questioning

14
00:00:55,840 --> 00:00:56,520
Speaker 3: his attorney.

15
00:00:56,880 --> 00:00:59,640
Speaker 4: You don't have any doubt that your client's a dangerous person.

16
00:00:59,400 --> 00:01:00,600
Speaker 5: Do you.

17
00:01:01,080 --> 00:01:02,880
Speaker 4: I would want to know what dangerous person means.

18
00:01:03,360 --> 00:01:07,039
Speaker 1: That's not being someone who's shooting at people.

19
00:01:07,880 --> 00:01:08,880
Speaker 4: That's a good start.

20
00:01:09,120 --> 00:01:12,880
Speaker 3: My guest is Second Amendment expert Adam Winkler, a professor

21
00:01:12,920 --> 00:01:16,520
Speaker 3: at UCLA Law School. Let's start with the big question.

22
00:01:17,000 --> 00:01:21,280
Speaker 3: Did it seem like justices across the board were inclined

23
00:01:21,280 --> 00:01:23,200
Speaker 3: to uphold this federal gun ban.

24
00:01:23,840 --> 00:01:24,360
Speaker 4: It did.

25
00:01:24,560 --> 00:01:27,360
Speaker 5: It felt very one sided in the Supreme Court, and

26
00:01:27,480 --> 00:01:30,440
Speaker 5: it felt like almost all the justices, if not all,

27
00:01:30,480 --> 00:01:34,400
Speaker 5: the justices, were inclined to uphold the federal ban in

28
00:01:34,400 --> 00:01:34,880
Speaker 5: this case.

29
00:01:35,360 --> 00:01:38,520
Speaker 3: This is the first test of last year's ruling in

30
00:01:38,600 --> 00:01:42,200
Speaker 3: Brewin that established a constitutional right to carry a handgun

31
00:01:42,240 --> 00:01:42,840
Speaker 3: in public.

32
00:01:43,120 --> 00:01:43,959
Speaker 1: So in order to.

33
00:01:44,000 --> 00:01:45,959
Speaker 3: Understand it, I think we have to take a look

34
00:01:46,000 --> 00:01:50,960
Speaker 3: at the historical analysis test established in Bruin that's caused

35
00:01:51,000 --> 00:01:53,800
Speaker 3: so much confusion in the lower courts and led to

36
00:01:53,840 --> 00:01:56,760
Speaker 3: them striking down gun control laws that have been on

37
00:01:56,800 --> 00:01:58,080
Speaker 3: the books for decades.

38
00:01:58,360 --> 00:01:59,960
Speaker 1: So tell us about that test.

39
00:02:00,480 --> 00:02:04,160
Speaker 5: In the Bruin case, Justice Thomas's majority opinion said that

40
00:02:04,280 --> 00:02:08,560
Speaker 5: for gun laws to be constitutionally permissible today, they must

41
00:02:08,720 --> 00:02:12,760
Speaker 5: have historical analogs in the seventeen and eighteen hundreds, when

42
00:02:12,760 --> 00:02:16,160
Speaker 5: the Second Amendment was adopted and the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted,

43
00:02:16,520 --> 00:02:19,760
Speaker 5: incorporating the Second Amendment to apply to the states. As

44
00:02:19,840 --> 00:02:22,799
Speaker 5: a result, courts have really struggled over the last year

45
00:02:22,919 --> 00:02:26,240
Speaker 5: or so trying to find gun laws back in those

46
00:02:26,320 --> 00:02:31,559
Speaker 5: days that are sufficiently analogous to many common sense, mainstream

47
00:02:31,639 --> 00:02:35,080
Speaker 5: gun laws that we have today. Truth be told, many

48
00:02:35,120 --> 00:02:38,359
Speaker 5: of our gun laws are kind of twentieth century inventions.

49
00:02:38,440 --> 00:02:41,600
Speaker 5: Bans on felons possessing firearms, bans on the mentally ill

50
00:02:41,639 --> 00:02:44,720
Speaker 5: possessing firearms, and the issue into this case, ban on

51
00:02:44,840 --> 00:02:48,680
Speaker 5: domestic abusers possessing firearms. These are laws that don't have

52
00:02:48,800 --> 00:02:53,079
Speaker 5: any obvious analog in the seventeen and eighteen hundreds, and

53
00:02:53,480 --> 00:02:56,120
Speaker 5: so this law was struck down by the Fifth Circuit,

54
00:02:56,240 --> 00:02:58,399
Speaker 5: just like courts around the country have been striking down

55
00:02:58,400 --> 00:03:02,120
Speaker 5: gun laws for lack of a clear historical precedent.

56
00:03:02,400 --> 00:03:05,640
Speaker 3: So then how did the justices get around that lack

57
00:03:05,680 --> 00:03:09,400
Speaker 3: of a clear historical precedent and all end up seemingly

58
00:03:09,560 --> 00:03:10,720
Speaker 3: in favor of this bank.

59
00:03:10,960 --> 00:03:13,000
Speaker 5: First of all, I think it's important to note what

60
00:03:13,240 --> 00:03:17,760
Speaker 5: Elizabeth Proligar, the Flicitor General, began her oral argument with

61
00:03:17,960 --> 00:03:21,640
Speaker 5: by noting the statistics that show that domestic abusers with

62
00:03:21,800 --> 00:03:26,000
Speaker 5: firearms are an incredibly deadly mix, and that forty eight

63
00:03:26,040 --> 00:03:29,240
Speaker 5: states and the federal government have prohibited domestic abusers from

64
00:03:29,280 --> 00:03:32,560
Speaker 5: possessing firearms, showing that what she intended to do was

65
00:03:32,600 --> 00:03:35,240
Speaker 5: not just rely on the history and tradition, but on

66
00:03:35,280 --> 00:03:38,320
Speaker 5: the common sense idea that some people are too dangerous

67
00:03:38,360 --> 00:03:41,440
Speaker 5: to have firearms. But the court seemed to be inclined

68
00:03:41,720 --> 00:03:46,160
Speaker 5: to do is allow the government to frame their gun

69
00:03:46,240 --> 00:03:49,200
Speaker 5: laws at a higher level of generality. You don't have

70
00:03:49,280 --> 00:03:52,280
Speaker 5: to show that there's a history and tradition of domestic

71
00:03:52,560 --> 00:03:56,400
Speaker 5: abusers being prohibited from possessing firearms, and of course there

72
00:03:56,480 --> 00:03:58,920
Speaker 5: isn't a long history and tradition of that, but maybe

73
00:03:58,960 --> 00:04:01,680
Speaker 5: you could show that there's a history and tradition of

74
00:04:01,800 --> 00:04:06,800
Speaker 5: prohibiting dangerous people from possessing firearms, and domestic abusers are

75
00:04:06,920 --> 00:04:09,960
Speaker 5: just a modern day understanding of people who are just

76
00:04:10,000 --> 00:04:10,920
Speaker 5: too dangerous to.

77
00:04:10,800 --> 00:04:14,480
Speaker 3: Have come Did the liberal justices seem like they wanted

78
00:04:14,480 --> 00:04:18,240
Speaker 3: to use this case to revisit that history based test.

79
00:04:18,720 --> 00:04:20,719
Speaker 3: Here's Justice Katanji Brown Jackson.

80
00:04:21,200 --> 00:04:23,480
Speaker 6: What's the point of going to the founding era? I mean,

81
00:04:23,520 --> 00:04:25,640
Speaker 6: I thought it was doing some work, but if we're

82
00:04:25,680 --> 00:04:32,200
Speaker 6: still applying modern sensibilities, I don't really understand the historical framing.

83
00:04:32,720 --> 00:04:36,680
Speaker 5: That did seem like she was pressing that it's very

84
00:04:36,720 --> 00:04:40,719
Speaker 5: hard to defend this domestic violence abuser ban when people

85
00:04:40,760 --> 00:04:43,240
Speaker 5: are subject to a restraining order in light of the

86
00:04:43,279 --> 00:04:46,520
Speaker 5: history and tradition of which that the Bruin Court offered.

87
00:04:46,920 --> 00:04:49,880
Speaker 5: Although Bruin said that you should look for analogous laws,

88
00:04:50,279 --> 00:04:52,039
Speaker 5: I think that at the end of the day, the

89
00:04:52,080 --> 00:04:55,839
Speaker 5: government is hard pressed to draw a very close analogy. Instead,

90
00:04:55,880 --> 00:04:59,159
Speaker 5: the analogies are very general and didn't exactly apply.

91
00:04:59,320 --> 00:05:03,640
Speaker 3: On point, did a majority of the Conservative justices seem

92
00:05:03,720 --> 00:05:06,840
Speaker 3: to want to limit any decision to the facts here?

93
00:05:07,240 --> 00:05:09,360
Speaker 3: Justice Neil Gorsitch said at one point, do we need

94
00:05:09,400 --> 00:05:10,479
Speaker 3: to get into any of that?

95
00:05:11,040 --> 00:05:15,719
Speaker 5: It did seem like several of the justices, including Justices Gorsch, Thomas,

96
00:05:15,839 --> 00:05:19,800
Speaker 5: and Alito, we're looking for ways to narrow the consequence

97
00:05:19,960 --> 00:05:23,479
Speaker 5: of ruling against Rahemi in this case and in favor

98
00:05:23,520 --> 00:05:26,599
Speaker 5: of upholding the law, talking about whether there might be

99
00:05:27,040 --> 00:05:30,479
Speaker 5: different as applied challenges that someone could bring, or whether

100
00:05:30,480 --> 00:05:33,520
Speaker 5: there might be some common law defenses that one could

101
00:05:33,600 --> 00:05:36,839
Speaker 5: bring to a charge that one was possessing a firearm

102
00:05:36,920 --> 00:05:40,480
Speaker 5: illegally in violation of the domestic violence restraining order, and

103
00:05:40,560 --> 00:05:44,400
Speaker 5: several of the justices leased Justice Alito expressed some discomfort

104
00:05:44,520 --> 00:05:47,839
Speaker 5: with the idea that these domestic violence restraining orders could

105
00:05:47,839 --> 00:05:51,560
Speaker 5: be very long lasting and yet don't have very serious

106
00:05:51,800 --> 00:05:57,160
Speaker 5: procedural requirements that correspond with broad notions of due process.

107
00:05:57,240 --> 00:06:01,000
Speaker 3: Perhaps, the Solicitor General said, the Court use the present

108
00:06:01,040 --> 00:06:03,640
Speaker 3: case to give more guidance to the lower courts and

109
00:06:03,720 --> 00:06:07,960
Speaker 3: to correct lower courts quote profound misreading of the bruined decision.

110
00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:11,560
Speaker 1: Do you think we'll get any major statements out of

111
00:06:11,600 --> 00:06:12,200
Speaker 1: this ruling.

112
00:06:12,880 --> 00:06:15,120
Speaker 5: I think that's going to be one of the big questions.

113
00:06:15,200 --> 00:06:18,520
Speaker 5: Is this a really narrow ruling that just cobbles together

114
00:06:18,600 --> 00:06:22,440
Speaker 5: a majority, or is it an opinion that will provide

115
00:06:22,520 --> 00:06:26,440
Speaker 5: more guidance to the lower courts. Justice Kagan specifically asked

116
00:06:26,480 --> 00:06:29,719
Speaker 5: about that and about the necessity, and the Solicitor General

117
00:06:29,720 --> 00:06:32,640
Speaker 5: had a very clear and precise answer that there were

118
00:06:32,920 --> 00:06:36,160
Speaker 5: three errors being committed by the lower courts. They were

119
00:06:36,160 --> 00:06:39,600
Speaker 5: only looking to regulation and not looking to other historical sources.

120
00:06:39,680 --> 00:06:42,480
Speaker 5: They were looking at regulation, but we're really looking for

121
00:06:42,680 --> 00:06:47,000
Speaker 5: twins rather than for historical analogs. And also that the

122
00:06:47,120 --> 00:06:50,919
Speaker 5: absence of regulation should not always be read against the government,

123
00:06:51,040 --> 00:06:53,760
Speaker 5: especially when a problem like domestic violence was not really

124
00:06:53,760 --> 00:06:55,240
Speaker 5: thought of as a problem back then.

125
00:06:55,640 --> 00:06:59,760
Speaker 3: So I admit that I find this historical analysis test

126
00:07:00,279 --> 00:07:04,640
Speaker 3: with Second Amendment cases just bordering on ridiculous. Were there

127
00:07:04,640 --> 00:07:08,720
Speaker 3: any clues as to whether the Conservatives remained behind the

128
00:07:08,800 --> 00:07:11,720
Speaker 3: historical analysis that Thomas put in place.

129
00:07:12,000 --> 00:07:14,880
Speaker 5: Well, I think that the Solicitor General made a very

130
00:07:14,920 --> 00:07:18,840
Speaker 5: strategic choice not to challenge the history and tradition test

131
00:07:18,920 --> 00:07:25,520
Speaker 5: of Bruin, but instead seek to, if anything, recapture its fluidity,

132
00:07:25,600 --> 00:07:29,040
Speaker 5: its ability to be useful to uphold laws, not just

133
00:07:29,080 --> 00:07:32,480
Speaker 5: to strike down laws. And so she was not asking

134
00:07:32,520 --> 00:07:35,280
Speaker 5: the court to abandon the history and tradition test. Rather,

135
00:07:35,360 --> 00:07:38,000
Speaker 5: she was saying that the lower courts have been misapplying

136
00:07:38,120 --> 00:07:40,560
Speaker 5: that test, and that to capture the true essence of

137
00:07:40,600 --> 00:07:43,520
Speaker 5: that test means that you should approach the issue the

138
00:07:43,560 --> 00:07:46,240
Speaker 5: way she did, at a slightly higher level of generality,

139
00:07:46,280 --> 00:07:50,960
Speaker 5: focusing on dangerousness rather than looking for historical precedence of

140
00:07:51,160 --> 00:07:54,280
Speaker 5: domestic abusers being prohibited access to firearms.

141
00:07:54,600 --> 00:07:57,080
Speaker 3: If you had to guess, would you guess that it's

142
00:07:57,120 --> 00:08:00,520
Speaker 3: going to be a limited opinion or a broader opinion.

143
00:08:00,880 --> 00:08:02,480
Speaker 5: If you were to guess, I would say this is

144
00:08:02,640 --> 00:08:05,440
Speaker 5: likely to be a nine to nothing, maybe eight to

145
00:08:05,480 --> 00:08:08,760
Speaker 5: one or seven to two opinion. And I think because

146
00:08:08,800 --> 00:08:11,600
Speaker 5: of that, the larger the majority, the less likely it

147
00:08:11,680 --> 00:08:14,200
Speaker 5: is to be very far reaching. That it may be

148
00:08:14,280 --> 00:08:17,080
Speaker 5: one of these cases that gets assigned to Justice gorsicch

149
00:08:17,200 --> 00:08:19,720
Speaker 5: to just do as little damage as possible to the

150
00:08:19,760 --> 00:08:22,360
Speaker 5: bruined test. But I do think that it's no matter

151
00:08:22,400 --> 00:08:25,800
Speaker 5: how big the majority is to uphold the federal law here.

152
00:08:25,920 --> 00:08:28,640
Speaker 5: If indeed the court does uphold the federal law here,

153
00:08:28,960 --> 00:08:32,600
Speaker 5: it will be very good news for gun safety reform advocates.

154
00:08:32,679 --> 00:08:35,679
Speaker 5: They've been struggling to defend gun laws in courts, bands

155
00:08:35,760 --> 00:08:39,199
Speaker 5: on guns without serial numbers, bands on assault weapons. Even

156
00:08:39,360 --> 00:08:42,000
Speaker 5: last week a court struck down the restriction on felons

157
00:08:42,000 --> 00:08:45,040
Speaker 5: possessing firearms. So if the court does move to this

158
00:08:45,120 --> 00:08:48,240
Speaker 5: higher level of generality it says that government can prohibit

159
00:08:48,360 --> 00:08:51,600
Speaker 5: people who are dangerous from having firearms, it would provide

160
00:08:51,600 --> 00:08:54,600
Speaker 5: a basis for defending a lot of core gun laws

161
00:08:54,640 --> 00:08:58,080
Speaker 5: that we really rely on in modern twenty first century.

162
00:08:57,720 --> 00:08:59,120
Speaker 7: America and adam.

163
00:08:59,240 --> 00:09:02,480
Speaker 3: Last week, so Supreme Court agreed to decide the fate

164
00:09:02,520 --> 00:09:06,640
Speaker 3: of the federal criminal ban on bump stocks, the attachments

165
00:09:06,640 --> 00:09:09,760
Speaker 3: that let a semi automatic rifle fire much like a

166
00:09:09,800 --> 00:09:10,439
Speaker 3: machine gun.

167
00:09:10,600 --> 00:09:12,360
Speaker 1: What do you make of that? Do you make anything

168
00:09:12,400 --> 00:09:12,640
Speaker 1: of it?

169
00:09:12,960 --> 00:09:13,080
Speaker 8: No?

170
00:09:13,200 --> 00:09:15,040
Speaker 5: I don't make much of it. I think that is

171
00:09:15,120 --> 00:09:18,120
Speaker 5: really an administrative law case. And it's about whether the

172
00:09:18,200 --> 00:09:23,120
Speaker 5: administrative agency went too far in interpreting its powers under

173
00:09:23,280 --> 00:09:27,439
Speaker 5: the Gun Control Act and other federal statutes that regulate firearms.

174
00:09:27,760 --> 00:09:30,040
Speaker 5: And so I think that although they both deal with

175
00:09:30,120 --> 00:09:33,719
Speaker 5: firearms regulation, both these cases, they're very different ones. A

176
00:09:33,800 --> 00:09:36,280
Speaker 5: Second Amendment case that's going to be decided on Second

177
00:09:36,280 --> 00:09:39,160
Speaker 5: Amendment grounds and how huge impact on how other Second

178
00:09:39,200 --> 00:09:41,760
Speaker 5: Amendment cases are handled. Whatever the court does on the

179
00:09:41,800 --> 00:09:45,520
Speaker 5: bump stocks will be much more important for administrative law

180
00:09:45,679 --> 00:09:49,679
Speaker 5: and the scope of administrative agency authority under the Constitution.

181
00:09:50,320 --> 00:09:53,600
Speaker 3: A lot of administrative law cases this term. Thanks so much,

182
00:09:53,600 --> 00:09:57,000
Speaker 3: Adam Best, Professor Adam Winkler of UCLI Law School.

183
00:09:57,320 --> 00:09:57,840
Speaker 1: A note.

184
00:09:57,920 --> 00:10:01,800
Speaker 3: Michael Bloomberg, the founder majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the

185
00:10:01,840 --> 00:10:04,760
Speaker 3: parent of Bloomberg Radio, is a donor to groups that

186
00:10:04,800 --> 00:10:09,160
Speaker 3: support gun control, including Every Town for Gun Safety. Coming

187
00:10:09,240 --> 00:10:13,320
Speaker 3: up next, the battle over abortion rights. This is Bloomberg Ohio.

188
00:10:13,520 --> 00:10:14,360
Speaker 7: We did it.

189
00:10:14,720 --> 00:10:17,200
Speaker 6: We did it.

190
00:10:17,200 --> 00:10:20,439
Speaker 3: It was a huge win for abortion rights in Ohio,

191
00:10:20,720 --> 00:10:24,280
Speaker 3: a Republican state where voters approved a ballot measure to

192
00:10:24,440 --> 00:10:27,520
Speaker 3: enshrine the right to an abortion in the state constitution

193
00:10:27,960 --> 00:10:31,200
Speaker 3: that gives abortion rights a seven out of seven winning

194
00:10:31,280 --> 00:10:35,000
Speaker 3: streak in state ballot initiative fights since the Supreme Court

195
00:10:35,080 --> 00:10:39,200
Speaker 3: overturned Roe v. Wade last year, and while abortion rights

196
00:10:39,280 --> 00:10:41,600
Speaker 3: may not have been on the ballot in other states,

197
00:10:41,880 --> 00:10:45,520
Speaker 3: it was the driving issue in races in Kentucky and Virginia,

198
00:10:45,840 --> 00:10:49,120
Speaker 3: where it trounced the opposition, beating back an attempt to

199
00:10:49,160 --> 00:10:55,520
Speaker 3: reframe the issue by Republicans. Thank you. Kentucky Democratic Governor

200
00:10:55,559 --> 00:10:59,480
Speaker 3: Andy Basher resoundingly won reelection in the red state of

201
00:10:59,559 --> 00:11:03,280
Speaker 3: Kentucky by putting abortion rights front and center in his

202
00:11:03,400 --> 00:11:08,400
Speaker 3: campaign against the Trump backed Republican Attorney general who supported

203
00:11:08,400 --> 00:11:11,760
Speaker 3: the states near total ban on abortion. Joining me is

204
00:11:11,800 --> 00:11:15,520
Speaker 3: an expert in reproductive rights, Mary Ziegler, a professor at

205
00:11:15,640 --> 00:11:19,920
Speaker 3: UC Davis Law School. Mary in Ohio, fifty six percent

206
00:11:20,520 --> 00:11:24,280
Speaker 3: voted for the constitutional right to abortion, despite a host

207
00:11:24,320 --> 00:11:28,000
Speaker 3: of obstacles put in the way by Republicans, including purging

208
00:11:28,000 --> 00:11:31,520
Speaker 3: the voter rolls and changing language in the ballot measure

209
00:11:31,960 --> 00:11:34,360
Speaker 3: to call a fetus and unborn child.

210
00:11:35,120 --> 00:11:37,679
Speaker 9: There have been a lot of obstacles. Republicans began by

211
00:11:37,679 --> 00:11:41,480
Speaker 9: trying to lift the threshold for passage of a ballot initiative,

212
00:11:41,679 --> 00:11:45,280
Speaker 9: and that proposal was defeated by Ohio voters in August.

213
00:11:45,640 --> 00:11:50,560
Speaker 9: There's been information published on official government websites in Ohio

214
00:11:50,840 --> 00:11:54,160
Speaker 9: giving a misleading account of what issue on the ballot

215
00:11:54,240 --> 00:11:59,000
Speaker 9: initiative would have meant. There's been the language anti worshion

216
00:11:59,080 --> 00:12:03,720
Speaker 9: language used to describe what voters were choosing. And yet,

217
00:12:03,760 --> 00:12:06,319
Speaker 9: you know, despite all of that, pulling on the valid

218
00:12:06,320 --> 00:12:10,560
Speaker 9: initiative actually been pretty remarkably consistent for some time now,

219
00:12:10,679 --> 00:12:13,400
Speaker 9: So voters had made up their minds and all of

220
00:12:13,440 --> 00:12:17,120
Speaker 9: these various strategies by Republicans didn't work.

221
00:12:17,679 --> 00:12:20,400
Speaker 3: Yeah, and also making it a no vote in August

222
00:12:20,400 --> 00:12:23,520
Speaker 3: but a yes vote in November. It seems like the

223
00:12:23,559 --> 00:12:27,120
Speaker 3: Republicans were just trying to sow confusion rather than waning

224
00:12:27,160 --> 00:12:28,120
Speaker 3: on the issue.

225
00:12:28,320 --> 00:12:30,000
Speaker 9: Yeah, I mean, I think that's one of the things

226
00:12:30,040 --> 00:12:33,599
Speaker 9: that's striking. There hasn't really been an effort in Ohio

227
00:12:33,600 --> 00:12:37,000
Speaker 9: to convince voters that abortion rights were a bad idea

228
00:12:37,040 --> 00:12:39,679
Speaker 9: on the merits. Instead, there have been efforts to stop

229
00:12:39,760 --> 00:12:43,520
Speaker 9: voters either from understanding the issue or deciding it. And

230
00:12:43,679 --> 00:12:46,800
Speaker 9: that obviously tells you Ohio Republicans were in trouble. Right,

231
00:12:46,840 --> 00:12:50,280
Speaker 9: If you yourself conceived that your position is that unpopular,

232
00:12:50,679 --> 00:12:53,480
Speaker 9: you're not starting from a position of strength. I think,

233
00:12:53,520 --> 00:12:55,760
Speaker 9: by the same token, if you've lost seven of seven

234
00:12:55,840 --> 00:12:59,000
Speaker 9: valid initiative races in the space of a year, the

235
00:12:59,080 --> 00:13:01,880
Speaker 9: problem is not you know, just packaging or funding that

236
00:13:01,960 --> 00:13:05,120
Speaker 9: the problem is substance, and I think that's becoming increasingly clear.

237
00:13:05,960 --> 00:13:08,600
Speaker 1: You mentioned the seven to zero winning street.

238
00:13:08,880 --> 00:13:12,640
Speaker 3: What have the abortion rights advocates been doing to be

239
00:13:12,800 --> 00:13:13,520
Speaker 3: so effective?

240
00:13:13,880 --> 00:13:15,920
Speaker 9: I mean, I think, first of all, they have the

241
00:13:16,200 --> 00:13:19,680
Speaker 9: advantage of what Republicans are doing in a lot of states.

242
00:13:19,760 --> 00:13:23,120
Speaker 9: Right So Republicans in Virginia, for example, tried to say, oh, hey,

243
00:13:23,160 --> 00:13:25,320
Speaker 9: you know, the Democrats are extreme because they don't want

244
00:13:25,360 --> 00:13:28,160
Speaker 9: there to be any restrictions on abortion. And it's been

245
00:13:28,160 --> 00:13:31,040
Speaker 9: easy for Democrats to carry that attack by pointing to

246
00:13:31,080 --> 00:13:33,120
Speaker 9: the bands that are actually on the books and large

247
00:13:33,120 --> 00:13:35,600
Speaker 9: spots of the country that are not, you know, moderate

248
00:13:35,720 --> 00:13:38,960
Speaker 9: compromises at all. I think the other thing that abortion

249
00:13:39,080 --> 00:13:42,800
Speaker 9: rights supporters have done relatively well is to realize that

250
00:13:42,880 --> 00:13:45,720
Speaker 9: ballot initiatives are very much the politics of the local.

251
00:13:46,000 --> 00:13:48,120
Speaker 9: So a message that will work in Ohio will not

252
00:13:48,200 --> 00:13:51,080
Speaker 9: necessarily work in California or Kansas. That you have to

253
00:13:51,160 --> 00:13:54,439
Speaker 9: tailor what you're saying how you write your valid initiative,

254
00:13:54,480 --> 00:13:57,800
Speaker 9: what arguments you make for it to the audience in

255
00:13:57,840 --> 00:14:01,160
Speaker 9: that state. And I think that's been pretty successfully done

256
00:14:01,200 --> 00:14:01,839
Speaker 9: too so far.

257
00:14:02,400 --> 00:14:06,000
Speaker 3: So in Virginia, along with the fear mongering, it seemed

258
00:14:06,040 --> 00:14:09,800
Speaker 3: like abortion opponents were trying out some new tactics, sort

259
00:14:09,800 --> 00:14:15,280
Speaker 3: of rebranding. Republicans, like the Governor Glenn Youngkin didn't talk

260
00:14:15,320 --> 00:14:19,120
Speaker 3: about abortion bans, but rather limits on abortion.

261
00:14:19,640 --> 00:14:21,520
Speaker 4: I really feel that this is a moment for us

262
00:14:21,560 --> 00:14:24,000
Speaker 4: to come together around reasonable limits.

263
00:14:24,160 --> 00:14:28,280
Speaker 3: Actually it seemed to backfire. Republicans lost control of both

264
00:14:28,400 --> 00:14:30,160
Speaker 3: chambers of the state legislature.

265
00:14:30,400 --> 00:14:33,040
Speaker 9: Governor Youngkin was on the record as saying that he

266
00:14:33,160 --> 00:14:36,240
Speaker 9: was piloting what he saw as a potential way forward

267
00:14:36,280 --> 00:14:39,280
Speaker 9: for Republicans on abortion in every state, and that was

268
00:14:39,320 --> 00:14:42,440
Speaker 9: to go on the offense and essentially accuse Democrats of

269
00:14:42,480 --> 00:14:46,920
Speaker 9: being the real extremists on abortion and using, like you said,

270
00:14:46,960 --> 00:14:50,280
Speaker 9: a limit, as Youngkin would have framed it, to rally

271
00:14:50,440 --> 00:14:55,560
Speaker 9: Republicans around. And that obviously didn't work, And if anything,

272
00:14:55,600 --> 00:14:58,360
Speaker 9: it seemed that the abortion issue helped Democrats, I think,

273
00:14:58,640 --> 00:15:02,000
Speaker 9: achieve a surprisingly good result in Virginia and taking control

274
00:15:02,040 --> 00:15:05,080
Speaker 9: of both houses of the Virginia legislature. And I think,

275
00:15:05,120 --> 00:15:07,960
Speaker 9: you know, the reason it didn't work is because Youngin

276
00:15:08,080 --> 00:15:12,720
Speaker 9: was using an old playbook before Roe was gone. Republicans

277
00:15:12,720 --> 00:15:16,800
Speaker 9: would hold up, you know, regulations that were popular in isolation,

278
00:15:17,120 --> 00:15:19,160
Speaker 9: like a fifteen week ban or a ban on so

279
00:15:19,240 --> 00:15:22,200
Speaker 9: called partial birth abortion, and say, you know, aren't you

280
00:15:22,360 --> 00:15:25,120
Speaker 9: for this voters and a lot of voters would say, sure,

281
00:15:25,160 --> 00:15:28,440
Speaker 9: you know, that sounds reasonable. But now when Democrats say

282
00:15:28,520 --> 00:15:31,280
Speaker 9: that isn't really where Glenn Youngkin wants to stop. That's

283
00:15:31,320 --> 00:15:33,680
Speaker 9: as much as he thinks he can get today. But

284
00:15:33,800 --> 00:15:35,600
Speaker 9: tomorrow he's going to come back and ask for a

285
00:15:35,640 --> 00:15:37,880
Speaker 9: six week ban or a ban at fertilization. That argument

286
00:15:37,920 --> 00:15:40,600
Speaker 9: has a lot more credibility with voters because, of course,

287
00:15:40,680 --> 00:15:43,440
Speaker 9: you know, anti abortion activists are admitting as much, anti

288
00:15:43,480 --> 00:15:46,960
Speaker 9: abortion politicians are admitting as much. There's many state bans

289
00:15:46,960 --> 00:15:49,640
Speaker 9: that already go that far. So when young Kin claims

290
00:15:49,640 --> 00:15:52,360
Speaker 9: to be the voice of moderation and reason, it doesn't

291
00:15:52,400 --> 00:15:55,360
Speaker 9: have the same force it would have before Dobbs. So

292
00:15:55,480 --> 00:15:57,880
Speaker 9: I think that's one of the reasons that strategy didn't

293
00:15:57,960 --> 00:16:00,000
Speaker 9: actually play out as Youngkin had planned.

294
00:16:00,560 --> 00:16:03,960
Speaker 3: Kentucky Governor Andy Basheer seemed to pull out all the

295
00:16:04,000 --> 00:16:08,200
Speaker 3: stops against his Republican opponent, Daniel Cameron. For example, he

296
00:16:08,320 --> 00:16:11,960
Speaker 3: ran a very stark attack ad that featured a young

297
00:16:12,000 --> 00:16:15,360
Speaker 3: woman who'd been raped by her stepfather when she was twelve.

298
00:16:15,840 --> 00:16:17,000
Speaker 1: Here's part of that ad.

299
00:16:17,480 --> 00:16:20,600
Speaker 8: This is to you, Daniel Cameron, to tell a twelve

300
00:16:20,680 --> 00:16:22,880
Speaker 8: year old girl she must have the baby of her

301
00:16:22,920 --> 00:16:27,560
Speaker 8: stepfather who raped her is unthinkable. I'm speaking out because

302
00:16:27,600 --> 00:16:31,240
Speaker 8: women and girls need to have options. Daniel Cameron would

303
00:16:31,280 --> 00:16:32,080
Speaker 8: give us none.

304
00:16:32,200 --> 00:16:35,080
Speaker 3: Mary, what's your take on Basher's campaign.

305
00:16:35,680 --> 00:16:37,800
Speaker 9: Well, I think what you're seeing in the fight between

306
00:16:37,840 --> 00:16:40,200
Speaker 9: Cameron and Bashir is sort of the mirror image of

307
00:16:40,240 --> 00:16:42,560
Speaker 9: what happens when you try to do the opposite of

308
00:16:42,600 --> 00:16:45,440
Speaker 9: what Glenn Youngkin did. So, at least at the beginning

309
00:16:45,480 --> 00:16:48,200
Speaker 9: of his campaign, Daniel Cameron said, I'm not going to

310
00:16:48,280 --> 00:16:50,400
Speaker 9: run away from my position on abortion. I'm going to

311
00:16:50,480 --> 00:16:52,720
Speaker 9: make it part of my campaign. I'm going to emphasize

312
00:16:52,720 --> 00:16:55,040
Speaker 9: that I've been in court, I've been the one fighting

313
00:16:55,080 --> 00:16:58,880
Speaker 9: for Kentucky's abortion band like I'm mister anti abortion right.

314
00:16:59,040 --> 00:17:02,000
Speaker 9: And I was happy to have him do that because

315
00:17:02,000 --> 00:17:04,040
Speaker 9: then Basher could say, you know, I am the voice

316
00:17:04,080 --> 00:17:06,120
Speaker 9: of reason right and not even really have to get

317
00:17:06,160 --> 00:17:09,400
Speaker 9: into questions about abortion that would be tricky in Kentucky.

318
00:17:09,480 --> 00:17:12,520
Speaker 9: He could focus on things like victims of sexual assault

319
00:17:12,560 --> 00:17:17,040
Speaker 9: and accuse Cameron of being heartless toward those patients and

320
00:17:17,480 --> 00:17:20,080
Speaker 9: leave any of the trickier questions in a red state

321
00:17:20,200 --> 00:17:23,919
Speaker 9: like Kentucky off the table. So I think the lesson

322
00:17:24,160 --> 00:17:27,479
Speaker 9: is that whether you're trying to strike a kind of

323
00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:33,080
Speaker 9: faux moderate tone like Youngkin, or you're trying to, you know,

324
00:17:33,640 --> 00:17:36,359
Speaker 9: run to energize the base, which I think is what

325
00:17:36,440 --> 00:17:39,760
Speaker 9: Cameron was doing, that there are perils either way.

326
00:17:40,240 --> 00:17:44,600
Speaker 3: Constitutional amendments to protect abortion access are already on the

327
00:17:44,640 --> 00:17:47,960
Speaker 3: ballot in twenty twenty four in Maryland and New York.

328
00:17:48,280 --> 00:17:51,320
Speaker 3: In what other states do you see momentum to put

329
00:17:51,359 --> 00:17:54,240
Speaker 3: abortion rights on the ballot in twenty twenty four?

330
00:17:54,560 --> 00:17:58,400
Speaker 9: Probably the most consequential is Florida. New York, and Maryland

331
00:17:58,560 --> 00:18:02,280
Speaker 9: are not in any real jeopardy of changing their abortion

332
00:18:02,480 --> 00:18:07,360
Speaker 9: policy significantly absent the constitutional amendment. Florida has a very

333
00:18:07,400 --> 00:18:10,480
Speaker 9: conservative state Supreme Court that is likely to overturn a

334
00:18:10,560 --> 00:18:14,080
Speaker 9: nineteen eighty nine precedent recognizing state of wors rights, So

335
00:18:14,200 --> 00:18:18,720
Speaker 9: absent intervention by voters, you're likely to see Florida's six

336
00:18:18,760 --> 00:18:21,439
Speaker 9: weekman go into effect in the not too distant future.

337
00:18:21,600 --> 00:18:26,240
Speaker 9: Florida is more complicated. Florida has a sixty percent threshold

338
00:18:26,359 --> 00:18:31,480
Speaker 9: for passing ballid initiatives. And second, there's already a challenge

339
00:18:32,000 --> 00:18:34,359
Speaker 9: before the Florida Supreme Court, which as I mentioned, is

340
00:18:34,520 --> 00:18:38,080
Speaker 9: very conservative, by the Attorney General, Ashley Moody that's attempting

341
00:18:38,160 --> 00:18:41,240
Speaker 9: to get that issue off the ballot by essentially arguing

342
00:18:41,280 --> 00:18:44,119
Speaker 9: it's confusing to voters. So this is another kind of

343
00:18:44,160 --> 00:18:46,479
Speaker 9: parallel to what we saw in Ohio, where Republicans are

344
00:18:46,480 --> 00:18:49,240
Speaker 9: trying to keep voters from weighing in, but this time

345
00:18:49,240 --> 00:18:52,000
Speaker 9: they're relying on a very conservative state Supreme Court, which

346
00:18:52,040 --> 00:18:54,359
Speaker 9: may be a more successful strategy.

347
00:18:54,880 --> 00:18:58,199
Speaker 3: Well, the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision left us with this

348
00:18:58,840 --> 00:19:02,600
Speaker 3: state by state fight over abortion rights. Thanks so much,

349
00:19:02,680 --> 00:19:06,040
Speaker 3: Mary Best, Professor Mary Ziegler of u C. Davis Law

350
00:19:06,080 --> 00:19:09,920
Speaker 3: School coming up next. Donald Trump shouts at the judge

351
00:19:09,920 --> 00:19:12,680
Speaker 3: in a wild day on the witness stand. I'm June

352
00:19:12,680 --> 00:19:14,720
Speaker 3: Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg.

353
00:19:15,320 --> 00:19:18,800
Speaker 8: It's a case that be dismissed. Immediately the fraud was

354
00:19:18,840 --> 00:19:21,119
Speaker 8: on the air from the court the court.

355
00:19:21,119 --> 00:19:23,359
Speaker 3: Was the fraud sturing this case.

356
00:19:23,480 --> 00:19:28,639
Speaker 10: They made references to assets that were very valued well,

357
00:19:28,720 --> 00:19:29,080
Speaker 10: and they.

358
00:19:29,000 --> 00:19:32,159
Speaker 5: Said they had no idea, they had no idea what

359
00:19:32,200 --> 00:19:32,960
Speaker 5: the numbers were.

360
00:19:33,200 --> 00:19:36,720
Speaker 3: Yes, you heard that correctly. Donald Trump said it was

361
00:19:36,800 --> 00:19:39,760
Speaker 3: the judge who committed fraud. It was a wild day

362
00:19:39,800 --> 00:19:42,400
Speaker 3: in the courtroom as the former president took the witness

363
00:19:42,440 --> 00:19:45,480
Speaker 3: stand on Monday in the New York Attorney General's two

364
00:19:45,560 --> 00:19:49,200
Speaker 3: hundred and fifty million dollars civil fraud trial over asset

365
00:19:49,320 --> 00:19:52,880
Speaker 3: valuations at the Trump organization. Less than an hour into

366
00:19:52,880 --> 00:19:57,040
Speaker 3: Trump's testimony, Judge Arthur and Goren, who will decide the case,

367
00:19:57,359 --> 00:20:00,000
Speaker 3: threaten to remove him from the stand for giving law

368
00:20:00,440 --> 00:20:04,240
Speaker 3: rambling answers to yes or no questions. New York agey

369
00:20:04,400 --> 00:20:07,679
Speaker 3: Letitia James said she wasn't surprised.

370
00:20:07,480 --> 00:20:14,600
Speaker 10: He rambled, he hurled insults, but we expected that. At

371
00:20:14,600 --> 00:20:19,159
Speaker 10: the end of the day, the documentary evidence demonstrated that,

372
00:20:19,200 --> 00:20:23,119
Speaker 10: in fact, he falsely inflated his assets to basically enrich

373
00:20:23,200 --> 00:20:28,160
Speaker 10: himself and his family. He continued to persistently engage in fraud.

374
00:20:28,960 --> 00:20:30,360
Speaker 1: The numbers don't lie.

375
00:20:30,600 --> 00:20:34,000
Speaker 3: Joining me is Bloomberg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado, who was

376
00:20:34,119 --> 00:20:37,200
Speaker 3: in the courtroom. So, pat what was it like in

377
00:20:37,240 --> 00:20:41,399
Speaker 3: the courtroom, because reading about the testimony, it seemed so

378
00:20:41,840 --> 00:20:45,399
Speaker 3: contentious and just off the rails at some point.

379
00:20:46,080 --> 00:20:48,879
Speaker 7: Basically, you know, those of us who are trial reporters

380
00:20:48,880 --> 00:20:52,040
Speaker 7: are used to the controlled environment where the lawyer asked

381
00:20:52,119 --> 00:20:54,639
Speaker 7: questions and the witnesses under oath and they're supposed to

382
00:20:54,640 --> 00:20:57,800
Speaker 7: answer truthfully to the best of their ability. Trump used

383
00:20:57,840 --> 00:21:00,639
Speaker 7: it as an opportunity, as a soapbox, to take the

384
00:21:00,680 --> 00:21:03,320
Speaker 7: stand and give the answer and make the statement and

385
00:21:03,359 --> 00:21:06,080
Speaker 7: give the spin that he wanted to give and how

386
00:21:06,119 --> 00:21:08,840
Speaker 7: he felt about this lawsuit. So he called it a

387
00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:11,920
Speaker 7: which hunt. He would give ad hoc answers that were

388
00:21:11,960 --> 00:21:15,120
Speaker 7: not to the exact question. He would just go off

389
00:21:15,160 --> 00:21:19,560
Speaker 7: on a diatribe or a long long comment that the

390
00:21:19,640 --> 00:21:22,000
Speaker 7: judge said, are we having to listen to an essay?

391
00:21:22,880 --> 00:21:25,359
Speaker 7: You know? I mean, at some point the judge was

392
00:21:25,359 --> 00:21:28,280
Speaker 7: trying to rein him in because the trial was veering

393
00:21:28,400 --> 00:21:32,200
Speaker 7: off the rails. He was talking about, you know, motives

394
00:21:32,240 --> 00:21:37,080
Speaker 7: and applying all kinds of nefarious machinations behind the seat

395
00:21:37,119 --> 00:21:40,560
Speaker 7: for wives. The lawsuit got brought, he called it fraud.

396
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:43,040
Speaker 7: He said, the judge sitting right next to him was

397
00:21:43,160 --> 00:21:46,720
Speaker 7: biased and said the case was crazy. And then the

398
00:21:47,000 --> 00:21:51,960
Speaker 7: attorney for the state said done, and then Trump said done.

399
00:21:52,400 --> 00:21:55,600
Speaker 7: But then he continued on and used every other question

400
00:21:55,880 --> 00:21:59,159
Speaker 7: as you know, a forum to air his grievances about

401
00:21:59,240 --> 00:22:02,399
Speaker 7: the feelings about the lawsuit, how great his company was,

402
00:22:02,640 --> 00:22:05,560
Speaker 7: how he has a beautiful company with beautiful numbers and

403
00:22:05,600 --> 00:22:08,040
Speaker 7: these are amazing, and he's so wealthy he could do

404
00:22:08,119 --> 00:22:08,959
Speaker 7: whatever he wanted.

405
00:22:09,160 --> 00:22:12,040
Speaker 3: Well, the judge at one point said, you can attack me,

406
00:22:12,200 --> 00:22:14,600
Speaker 3: but just answer the question. Did he lose his temper?

407
00:22:14,960 --> 00:22:18,600
Speaker 7: Well, the judge several times stopped and said, can you

408
00:22:18,680 --> 00:22:22,800
Speaker 7: please control your client? And he turned to Kaist Christopher Kais,

409
00:22:22,880 --> 00:22:24,920
Speaker 7: who is a lawyer for Trump, and he asked him,

410
00:22:24,920 --> 00:22:27,560
Speaker 7: could you please control your client. And he was basically

411
00:22:27,600 --> 00:22:31,719
Speaker 7: suggesting that he would dismiss Trump from the witness stand

412
00:22:32,359 --> 00:22:35,520
Speaker 7: and he is allowed in the civil lawsuit to draw.

413
00:22:35,520 --> 00:22:39,000
Speaker 7: It was called an adverse inference. You know, basically, all

414
00:22:39,040 --> 00:22:42,120
Speaker 7: bets are off, and I'm going to vote against mister

415
00:22:42,119 --> 00:22:44,080
Speaker 7: Trump because he didn't think he was being honest.

416
00:22:44,520 --> 00:22:48,800
Speaker 3: So did Kays at one point argue that Trump had

417
00:22:48,840 --> 00:22:52,000
Speaker 3: a right to speak as a presidential candidate on the

418
00:22:52,040 --> 00:22:53,520
Speaker 3: witness stand yes.

419
00:22:53,600 --> 00:22:57,000
Speaker 7: He called him the former and soon to be chief

420
00:22:57,119 --> 00:23:01,000
Speaker 7: executive of the United States who understands the rules, and

421
00:23:01,040 --> 00:23:04,159
Speaker 7: the judge says, but he doesn't abide by them. And

422
00:23:04,280 --> 00:23:06,480
Speaker 7: Kys was basically arguing he has a right to do

423
00:23:06,520 --> 00:23:09,600
Speaker 7: whatever he wants because he's running for president and his

424
00:23:09,760 --> 00:23:12,880
Speaker 7: pre speech rights as a presidential candidate were being impaired.

425
00:23:13,400 --> 00:23:16,600
Speaker 3: So what did he say about the financial statements? Did

426
00:23:16,640 --> 00:23:17,840
Speaker 3: he make any admissions?

427
00:23:18,200 --> 00:23:22,280
Speaker 7: He did acknowledge that he had signed. There were many

428
00:23:22,400 --> 00:23:25,520
Speaker 7: times where they showed him guarantees they gave banks like

429
00:23:25,600 --> 00:23:29,520
Speaker 7: Deutsche Bank for loans or loan guarantees for the Durrell

430
00:23:29,640 --> 00:23:33,080
Speaker 7: Golf Club in Florida as well as for Trump Tower

431
00:23:33,080 --> 00:23:36,080
Speaker 7: in Chicago, that he would guarantee that he had a

432
00:23:36,119 --> 00:23:39,399
Speaker 7: certain amount of net worth. So basically he guaranteed it.

433
00:23:39,440 --> 00:23:42,240
Speaker 7: So he was having to admit on the stand that

434
00:23:42,359 --> 00:23:46,360
Speaker 7: he had indeed signed and endorsed and affirmed the accuracy

435
00:23:46,480 --> 00:23:50,159
Speaker 7: of the financial documents. They're called statements of financial conditions

436
00:23:50,200 --> 00:23:53,320
Speaker 7: that Trump org had submitted attesting to the value of

437
00:23:53,359 --> 00:23:55,680
Speaker 7: their properties and how much money they had on hand.

438
00:23:55,760 --> 00:23:58,639
Speaker 7: For example, attesting that he had twenty billion dollars in

439
00:23:58,760 --> 00:24:02,359
Speaker 7: net worth in the end, he could not distance himself

440
00:24:02,359 --> 00:24:04,800
Speaker 7: from something that he had affirmed and signed and sworn

441
00:24:04,960 --> 00:24:08,720
Speaker 7: was accurate. He attested that Joetscha Bank, for example, he said,

442
00:24:08,800 --> 00:24:11,280
Speaker 7: was not defraudst They got great loans and there were

443
00:24:11,320 --> 00:24:13,080
Speaker 7: worth a lot of money, and the bank was not

444
00:24:13,119 --> 00:24:15,880
Speaker 7: a victim. And so for the lawsuit that the attorney

445
00:24:15,920 --> 00:24:20,280
Speaker 7: generalist brought was basically nonsense and quote unquote crazy. But

446
00:24:20,480 --> 00:24:22,800
Speaker 7: you know, Deutsche Bank has said have they known the

447
00:24:22,840 --> 00:24:25,639
Speaker 7: true value, They may have not agreed to certain terms

448
00:24:25,640 --> 00:24:28,159
Speaker 7: that they let Trump have. So this is now going

449
00:24:28,200 --> 00:24:30,919
Speaker 7: to be up to the judge. And at one point

450
00:24:31,040 --> 00:24:35,120
Speaker 7: the judge interrupted Trump and asked the state lawyer, are

451
00:24:35,160 --> 00:24:38,040
Speaker 7: you okay with this because it seems like he's going

452
00:24:38,160 --> 00:24:41,600
Speaker 7: off again, And the state lawyer, Kevin Wallace, said, he

453
00:24:41,640 --> 00:24:45,600
Speaker 7: thinks it's great. It sounds like what the state is

454
00:24:45,640 --> 00:24:50,000
Speaker 7: happy about is. Trump did not distance himself. He acknowledged

455
00:24:50,040 --> 00:24:53,120
Speaker 7: those were his signatures. He acknowledged he did sign those

456
00:24:53,160 --> 00:24:56,240
Speaker 7: documents which eventually did go to the banks. He said

457
00:24:56,280 --> 00:24:57,960
Speaker 7: it was up to the banks to do their own

458
00:24:58,040 --> 00:25:00,919
Speaker 7: due diligence, and that there's this clause at the very

459
00:25:00,960 --> 00:25:04,320
Speaker 7: bottom that basically plausible deniability. You know, it's like an

460
00:25:04,440 --> 00:25:08,080
Speaker 7: escape clause that Trump claimed the onus was on the

461
00:25:08,160 --> 00:25:11,280
Speaker 7: bank to do their own due diligence and not rely

462
00:25:11,400 --> 00:25:13,920
Speaker 7: on the accuracy of the numbers the Trump board gave them.

463
00:25:14,160 --> 00:25:16,879
Speaker 7: So you know, he's saying it's the fall to the

464
00:25:16,920 --> 00:25:20,119
Speaker 7: banks and the insurers for not doing better due diligence.

465
00:25:20,160 --> 00:25:22,960
Speaker 7: But the documents are what they say, so I can

466
00:25:23,000 --> 00:25:26,040
Speaker 7: see why the Attorney General may feel that they've actually

467
00:25:26,280 --> 00:25:28,760
Speaker 7: gotten a lot out of Trumps, just what they needed.

468
00:25:29,160 --> 00:25:32,560
Speaker 3: And also, is he claiming that Mara a Lago is

469
00:25:32,600 --> 00:25:34,640
Speaker 3: worth like a billion dollars?

470
00:25:35,240 --> 00:25:38,240
Speaker 7: Yes, he said it was worth a billion. And this

471
00:25:38,400 --> 00:25:41,800
Speaker 7: is a strange answer that's been given by the Trump sons,

472
00:25:41,880 --> 00:25:44,840
Speaker 7: Don Junior as well as Eric, that mar A Lago

473
00:25:45,359 --> 00:25:49,080
Speaker 7: supposedly had a National Register of Historic Places preventing it

474
00:25:49,119 --> 00:25:53,399
Speaker 7: from being developed as anything but this historic property it's

475
00:25:53,440 --> 00:25:55,719
Speaker 7: when it was built by Merriweather Posts. You know, it's

476
00:25:55,720 --> 00:25:59,359
Speaker 7: this beautiful nineteen twenty mansion and it's on the water,

477
00:25:59,640 --> 00:26:02,680
Speaker 7: and Trump bought it and then claims that he could

478
00:26:02,720 --> 00:26:05,800
Speaker 7: develop it. And he did this also for a Scottish

479
00:26:05,840 --> 00:26:09,120
Speaker 7: golf club that he wanted to develop. So he claims

480
00:26:09,160 --> 00:26:12,280
Speaker 7: these properties he could do whatever he wanted, so if

481
00:26:12,280 --> 00:26:16,320
Speaker 7: it was okay for them to overvalue properties like Mara

482
00:26:16,320 --> 00:26:19,280
Speaker 7: a Lago. It's a club, but it could also be

483
00:26:19,320 --> 00:26:22,200
Speaker 7: a residence, but it cannot be both. But Trump and

484
00:26:22,280 --> 00:26:25,359
Speaker 7: his sons have said it's a club and a home,

485
00:26:25,640 --> 00:26:28,240
Speaker 7: so he can do whatever he wants, and sometime later

486
00:26:28,280 --> 00:26:31,040
Speaker 7: it could be changed, totally ignoring the fact that the

487
00:26:31,119 --> 00:26:33,399
Speaker 7: National Register of much of our places says you can't

488
00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:35,840
Speaker 7: change the construction of the building.

489
00:26:36,320 --> 00:26:40,560
Speaker 3: Far, far, far more restrained was the testimony of Ivanka

490
00:26:40,600 --> 00:26:45,280
Speaker 3: Trump on Wednesday. She'd been an executive vice president at

491
00:26:45,280 --> 00:26:49,600
Speaker 3: the Trump Organization. My main question is did Ivanka throw

492
00:26:49,640 --> 00:26:52,240
Speaker 3: her father under the bus in any way?

493
00:26:52,480 --> 00:26:56,040
Speaker 7: Now, she was a very measured witness. She did not

494
00:26:56,240 --> 00:26:59,640
Speaker 7: throw her father under the bus, even in the tiniest way.

495
00:27:00,080 --> 00:27:04,679
Speaker 7: She was a very measured, controlled witness who did not

496
00:27:04,920 --> 00:27:08,760
Speaker 7: have a very strong memory. And her tact to me

497
00:27:08,920 --> 00:27:12,320
Speaker 7: seemed to be that she would answer questions posed to

498
00:27:12,359 --> 00:27:16,280
Speaker 7: her by the New York Attorney General saying, do you

499
00:27:16,359 --> 00:27:19,000
Speaker 7: remember that you find this document or do you remember

500
00:27:19,040 --> 00:27:21,840
Speaker 7: that you were involved in this transaction? And her answer

501
00:27:22,119 --> 00:27:25,280
Speaker 7: was a repetitive I don't remember it happened, but I

502
00:27:25,320 --> 00:27:27,480
Speaker 7: remember you showed it to me last year when you

503
00:27:27,560 --> 00:27:31,160
Speaker 7: interviewed me. So the totality of her memory was limited

504
00:27:31,200 --> 00:27:33,560
Speaker 7: to I only saw this once before when you showed

505
00:27:33,560 --> 00:27:36,119
Speaker 7: it to me, but I have absolutely no memory of

506
00:27:36,160 --> 00:27:37,400
Speaker 7: the actual transaction.

507
00:27:37,840 --> 00:27:42,000
Speaker 3: She was a point person in establishing a lending relationship

508
00:27:42,040 --> 00:27:44,880
Speaker 3: with Deutsche Bank Private Wealth Management arm.

509
00:27:45,160 --> 00:27:48,639
Speaker 7: She was testifying about how did it come about this

510
00:27:48,720 --> 00:27:53,160
Speaker 7: relationship with Deutsche Bank, and she testifies that her husband,

511
00:27:53,400 --> 00:27:56,639
Speaker 7: her father, and the Trump Org had a prior relationship

512
00:27:56,640 --> 00:28:00,840
Speaker 7: with Deutsche Bank in the real estate section, but her husband,

513
00:28:00,880 --> 00:28:05,760
Speaker 7: Jared Kushner, introduced her to the private wealth management group

514
00:28:05,960 --> 00:28:09,480
Speaker 7: in Deutsche Bank, which gave her what the Attorney general

515
00:28:09,680 --> 00:28:15,280
Speaker 7: claims are more favorable terms based on financial documents and

516
00:28:15,359 --> 00:28:19,240
Speaker 7: statements of financial condition that were submitted that were fraudulent.

517
00:28:19,440 --> 00:28:22,600
Speaker 7: So the New York Attorney General alleges that with the

518
00:28:22,640 --> 00:28:25,679
Speaker 7: Trump Or gave Deutsche Bank to get these more favorable

519
00:28:25,880 --> 00:28:30,960
Speaker 7: terms were fraudulent because they were inflated values and inflated statements.

520
00:28:31,000 --> 00:28:35,200
Speaker 3: So she was the point person they renegotiated. But yet

521
00:28:35,240 --> 00:28:38,720
Speaker 3: she said she wasn't involved and had no knowledge of

522
00:28:38,720 --> 00:28:40,440
Speaker 3: his personal financial statements.

523
00:28:40,920 --> 00:28:44,040
Speaker 7: It was more like she said she was not involved.

524
00:28:44,080 --> 00:28:47,440
Speaker 7: She never saw them, per say. She assumed they were accurate,

525
00:28:47,760 --> 00:28:50,400
Speaker 7: but she distanced herself from the whole scenario.

526
00:28:50,640 --> 00:28:51,520
Speaker 5: How did these.

527
00:28:51,320 --> 00:28:54,560
Speaker 7: Documents get created? It was not up to her with

528
00:28:54,640 --> 00:28:56,440
Speaker 7: her father's business, with his people.

529
00:28:56,800 --> 00:28:59,880
Speaker 3: So the defense case starts on Monday with more test

530
00:29:00,000 --> 00:29:04,560
Speaker 3: stimony from Donald Trump Junior. Thanks Pat, that's Bloomberg legal

531
00:29:04,600 --> 00:29:10,600
Speaker 3: reporter Patricia Hurtado coming up. A celebrity choreographer wins against Fortnite.

532
00:29:10,680 --> 00:29:26,440
Speaker 3: I'm Jim Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. Kyle Hanagami's

533
00:29:26,480 --> 00:29:31,200
Speaker 3: choreography has been used by celebrities like Justin Bieber, Britney Spears,

534
00:29:31,240 --> 00:29:35,120
Speaker 3: and BTS. He says it's also been used by Fortnite,

535
00:29:35,200 --> 00:29:39,920
Speaker 3: but without his permission. Hanagami has a federal copyright registration

536
00:29:40,480 --> 00:29:43,480
Speaker 3: covering a full five minute dance routine from his video

537
00:29:43,640 --> 00:29:47,080
Speaker 3: to Charlie Booth's song how Long, and he's claiming that

538
00:29:47,160 --> 00:29:51,120
Speaker 3: Epic Games Fortnite infringed on that copyright by using his

539
00:29:51,280 --> 00:29:54,760
Speaker 3: choreography as an emote in the video game that's a

540
00:29:54,920 --> 00:29:58,920
Speaker 3: viable dance for a player's avatar. Other choreographers have not

541
00:29:59,080 --> 00:30:02,560
Speaker 3: fared well with suits against Fortnite, But the Ninth Circuit

542
00:30:02,560 --> 00:30:05,320
Speaker 3: Court of Appeals has put a new spin on the moves.

543
00:30:05,720 --> 00:30:09,000
Speaker 3: Joining me is intellectual property attorney Ryan Meyer of Dorsey

544
00:30:09,040 --> 00:30:13,120
Speaker 3: and Whitney. So Ryan, As the Ninth Circuit said, copyright

545
00:30:13,160 --> 00:30:18,480
Speaker 3: protections for choreography remain a largely undefined area of law.

546
00:30:18,880 --> 00:30:22,000
Speaker 3: But can you describe what might make a dance copyrightable?

547
00:30:22,360 --> 00:30:26,000
Speaker 4: There aren't any bright line rules. There's a series of

548
00:30:26,480 --> 00:30:30,320
Speaker 4: non determinative elements. Whether there is rhythmic movement in a

549
00:30:30,360 --> 00:30:37,120
Speaker 4: defined space, the compositional arrangement, musical architectual accompaniment, dramatic content,

550
00:30:37,520 --> 00:30:42,240
Speaker 4: presentation before an audience, and execution by skilled performers. The

551
00:30:42,320 --> 00:30:46,200
Speaker 4: length doesn't necessarily matter, although the longer and more complex,

552
00:30:46,320 --> 00:30:48,160
Speaker 4: the more likely it is to be protectable.

553
00:30:49,040 --> 00:30:53,400
Speaker 3: So Hanagami was able to get a copyright for his choreography.

554
00:30:53,480 --> 00:30:55,840
Speaker 3: Here tell us about the dance itself.

555
00:30:57,160 --> 00:31:00,360
Speaker 4: The dance contains about four hundred and eighty counts of chography,

556
00:31:00,520 --> 00:31:04,200
Speaker 4: with ninety six repeated counts, But what was actually allegedly

557
00:31:04,240 --> 00:31:09,200
Speaker 4: misappropriated are just four counts of the choreographer's work, which

558
00:31:09,240 --> 00:31:12,880
Speaker 4: the District Court described as a two second combination of

559
00:31:12,960 --> 00:31:17,280
Speaker 4: eight bodily movements set to four beats of music. Now Fortnite.

560
00:31:17,480 --> 00:31:20,480
Speaker 4: In that game, you have an avatar, and one of

561
00:31:20,520 --> 00:31:23,520
Speaker 4: the ways that they make money is in a marketplace

562
00:31:23,600 --> 00:31:27,000
Speaker 4: they sell what are called emotes, which are dance movements

563
00:31:27,080 --> 00:31:29,560
Speaker 4: or other kinds of movements that you can buy and

564
00:31:29,600 --> 00:31:34,040
Speaker 4: have your avatar perform them. And so here the emote

565
00:31:34,360 --> 00:31:39,280
Speaker 4: is called it's complicated, and it's this small portion of

566
00:31:39,480 --> 00:31:42,400
Speaker 4: Kyle Hanagami's copyrighted five minute work.

567
00:31:42,960 --> 00:31:46,080
Speaker 3: He sued and tell us what happened at the district

568
00:31:46,120 --> 00:31:46,720
Speaker 3: court level.

569
00:31:47,440 --> 00:31:50,640
Speaker 4: Well, the district court level, he didn't make it very far.

570
00:31:50,840 --> 00:31:56,280
Speaker 4: He filed his complaint and in response, Epic Games filed

571
00:31:56,320 --> 00:31:59,280
Speaker 4: what is called a motion to dismissed, claiming that the

572
00:31:59,360 --> 00:32:03,920
Speaker 4: choreographer had not sufficiently alleged that there was substantial similarity

573
00:32:03,960 --> 00:32:07,920
Speaker 4: between what was copied, and the district court agreed and

574
00:32:08,280 --> 00:32:12,040
Speaker 4: found that when the dance that was copied is divided

575
00:32:12,080 --> 00:32:14,680
Speaker 4: up into a series of poses, those poses are not

576
00:32:14,800 --> 00:32:18,280
Speaker 4: copyright protectable. Moreover, the part that was actually copied, it

577
00:32:18,320 --> 00:32:22,080
Speaker 4: was just a short, relatively simple part of the overall work,

578
00:32:22,200 --> 00:32:24,080
Speaker 4: which is not protectable by copyright.

579
00:32:24,600 --> 00:32:28,080
Speaker 3: So the district court judge dismissed Hanagami's complaint, and he

580
00:32:28,160 --> 00:32:31,480
Speaker 3: appealed to the Ninth Circuit. How did the Ninth Circuit rule?

581
00:32:31,680 --> 00:32:35,000
Speaker 4: So, the Ninth Circuit decided that the District court judge

582
00:32:35,160 --> 00:32:40,800
Speaker 4: had essentially applied the long standard for determining substantial similarity

583
00:32:41,200 --> 00:32:46,560
Speaker 4: a copyrighted work like choreography, when parsed into individual movements,

584
00:32:46,680 --> 00:32:50,400
Speaker 4: each individual movement might not be protectable, which is essentially

585
00:32:50,400 --> 00:32:53,800
Speaker 4: what the District Cork judge found and stopped there. But

586
00:32:54,360 --> 00:32:56,880
Speaker 4: the combination of them, the selection and the arrangement to

587
00:32:56,960 --> 00:33:00,040
Speaker 4: other elements, the pathways between each movement. When all that

588
00:33:00,160 --> 00:33:03,959
Speaker 4: is combined, the Ninth Circuit found that it could be

589
00:33:04,000 --> 00:33:07,000
Speaker 4: a copyrightable work. And the Ninth Circuit also said it

590
00:33:07,040 --> 00:33:10,280
Speaker 4: was an air for the court to find that this

591
00:33:10,360 --> 00:33:15,520
Speaker 4: particular sequence was too simple and short to be copyright protectable, because,

592
00:33:15,600 --> 00:33:19,480
Speaker 4: as the court pointed out, even a very short sequence

593
00:33:19,720 --> 00:33:22,680
Speaker 4: can still be relatively complex. The court actually compared it

594
00:33:22,720 --> 00:33:29,040
Speaker 4: to dividing a choreographic work into just its individual poses

595
00:33:29,560 --> 00:33:33,360
Speaker 4: would be like dividing a musical work just into its

596
00:33:33,400 --> 00:33:34,360
Speaker 4: individual notes.

597
00:33:34,760 --> 00:33:36,920
Speaker 3: And so the case will now go back to the

598
00:33:36,960 --> 00:33:41,360
Speaker 3: District Court for further proceedings. As they say, Thanks Ryan

599
00:33:41,880 --> 00:33:45,280
Speaker 3: that's Ryan Meyer of Dorsey and Whitney. This is Bloomberg

600
00:33:45,360 --> 00:33:47,800
Speaker 3: Law on Bloomberg Radio. I'm June Grosso.

601
00:33:48,200 --> 00:33:48,840
Speaker 1: Stay with us.

602
00:33:48,840 --> 00:33:52,200
Speaker 3: Today's top stories and global business headlines are coming up

603
00:33:52,360 --> 00:33:52,920
Speaker 3: right now