1
00:00:02,880 --> 00:00:07,640
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosseo from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:09,240 --> 00:00:13,560
Speaker 2: I just know that on a daylight today that redemption

3
00:00:14,360 --> 00:00:15,200
Speaker 2: is possible.

4
00:00:15,720 --> 00:00:19,000
Speaker 3: Nearly thirty years after there were sentenced to life in

5
00:00:19,079 --> 00:00:22,919
Speaker 3: prison without the possibility of parole for the cold blooded

6
00:00:23,000 --> 00:00:26,480
Speaker 3: murders of their parents, a remarkable turn for Eric and

7
00:00:26,560 --> 00:00:29,920
Speaker 3: Lyle Menendez. They now have a chance of getting out

8
00:00:30,000 --> 00:00:34,159
Speaker 3: of prison. Family members have supported the brothers throughout the years,

9
00:00:34,440 --> 00:00:37,239
Speaker 3: and they were in court to testify for them at

10
00:00:37,240 --> 00:00:39,280
Speaker 3: a re sentencing hearing on Tuesday.

11
00:00:39,640 --> 00:00:44,040
Speaker 4: They are truly deeply sorry for what they did, and

12
00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:48,280
Speaker 4: they are profoundly remorseful. They are filled with remorse over

13
00:00:48,320 --> 00:00:51,320
Speaker 4: what they did, and through that they have become pretty

14
00:00:51,320 --> 00:00:52,320
Speaker 4: remarkable with people.

15
00:00:53,680 --> 00:00:57,279
Speaker 5: This is something my grandmother, Joan has fought for or

16
00:00:57,320 --> 00:01:02,400
Speaker 5: for thirty five years. I really wish she was here today,

17
00:01:03,520 --> 00:01:06,639
Speaker 5: but I'm really excited to give her the news.

18
00:01:07,280 --> 00:01:11,200
Speaker 3: The new LA District Attorney Nathan Hafckman had attempted to

19
00:01:11,240 --> 00:01:16,360
Speaker 3: block the resentencing at every turn, arguing repeatedly that Eric

20
00:01:16,400 --> 00:01:20,399
Speaker 3: and Lyle had not taken complete responsibility for their crimes

21
00:01:20,480 --> 00:01:22,720
Speaker 3: and didn't show true remorse in.

22
00:01:22,760 --> 00:01:24,600
Speaker 1: Order to be truly rehabilitated.

23
00:01:24,720 --> 00:01:28,440
Speaker 6: You have to acknowledge the full breath of your criminal conduct,

24
00:01:28,480 --> 00:01:30,360
Speaker 6: your cover up, and your life.

25
00:01:30,440 --> 00:01:34,440
Speaker 3: But Lyle told the judge, I take full responsibility. I

26
00:01:34,560 --> 00:01:38,040
Speaker 3: killed my parents. I offer no excuse and I don't

27
00:01:38,040 --> 00:01:42,440
Speaker 3: blame my parents. Eric said, I have profound sorrow for

28
00:01:42,520 --> 00:01:45,679
Speaker 3: the tragedy I created. I took the lives of my

29
00:01:45,840 --> 00:01:50,120
Speaker 3: mom and dad. My actions were criminal, cruel, and cowardly.

30
00:01:50,640 --> 00:01:55,480
Speaker 3: After their statements, Judge Michael Jessic reduced their sentences from

31
00:01:55,560 --> 00:01:59,639
Speaker 3: life in prison without parole to fifty years to life,

32
00:02:00,200 --> 00:02:04,400
Speaker 3: making them immediately eligible for parole. But there's still a

33
00:02:04,520 --> 00:02:08,000
Speaker 3: long road ahead that goes through the parole board and

34
00:02:08,080 --> 00:02:11,640
Speaker 3: the governor. My guest is Dave Ahrenberg, former Palm Beach

35
00:02:11,720 --> 00:02:15,000
Speaker 3: County State Attorney and managing partner.

36
00:02:14,680 --> 00:02:16,160
Speaker 1: At Dave Ehrenberg Law.

37
00:02:16,800 --> 00:02:20,840
Speaker 3: Dave, let's talk about what this resentencing hearing was and

38
00:02:20,880 --> 00:02:25,280
Speaker 3: what it wasn't. It wasn't about re litigating the murders,

39
00:02:25,440 --> 00:02:29,000
Speaker 3: but it was about whether the brothers have been rehabilitated.

40
00:02:29,520 --> 00:02:33,960
Speaker 2: This hearing was surely for the judge to decide whether

41
00:02:34,040 --> 00:02:37,799
Speaker 2: or not the Menendez brothers can be resentenced, and he

42
00:02:37,800 --> 00:02:43,000
Speaker 2: heard testimony from family members and decided that in the

43
00:02:43,040 --> 00:02:47,280
Speaker 2: interest of justice, that Menanda's brothers would be resentenced under

44
00:02:47,560 --> 00:02:51,359
Speaker 2: the rules of the time, which permitted someone who committed

45
00:02:51,400 --> 00:02:54,160
Speaker 2: such a horrific offense who's under the age of twenty

46
00:02:54,200 --> 00:02:57,600
Speaker 2: six to be eligible for parole. At the time, they

47
00:02:57,600 --> 00:03:00,839
Speaker 2: were sentenced to life in prison without parole. But now

48
00:03:00,840 --> 00:03:03,680
Speaker 2: they're changing it to with pearol and now the Menendez

49
00:03:03,720 --> 00:03:05,880
Speaker 2: brothers can go before the parole board.

50
00:03:05,760 --> 00:03:06,359
Speaker 7: To let him out.

51
00:03:06,400 --> 00:03:11,799
Speaker 3: Early Nathan Hawkman, the LA District Attorney, opposed to resentencing

52
00:03:12,320 --> 00:03:15,320
Speaker 3: and attempted to block it in every way he could.

53
00:03:15,800 --> 00:03:17,800
Speaker 1: Why was he so opposed to it?

54
00:03:18,120 --> 00:03:21,240
Speaker 2: He ran on a law and ordered platform and he

55
00:03:21,320 --> 00:03:24,120
Speaker 2: got elected to be tougher on crime as opposed to

56
00:03:24,160 --> 00:03:27,399
Speaker 2: the predecessor, Gassone, who was seen as one of those

57
00:03:27,440 --> 00:03:31,720
Speaker 2: Soro's reform prosecutors. So this is in line with Takman's

58
00:03:31,760 --> 00:03:35,440
Speaker 2: brand to be tough on crime. And he represented what

59
00:03:35,520 --> 00:03:38,600
Speaker 2: I considered like pres the silent majority, not the celebrities

60
00:03:38,640 --> 00:03:41,960
Speaker 2: who came out and masked to support the Menendez brothers,

61
00:03:42,120 --> 00:03:45,400
Speaker 2: but people who said, I remember this horrific crime and

62
00:03:45,640 --> 00:03:48,720
Speaker 2: they were sentence a life in prison to get life

63
00:03:48,760 --> 00:03:51,520
Speaker 2: in prison and that didn't mean thirty five years in prison.

64
00:03:51,960 --> 00:03:56,200
Speaker 3: The testimony was from family members about how they have

65
00:03:56,600 --> 00:03:59,080
Speaker 3: rehabilitated themselves in prison.

66
00:04:00,080 --> 00:04:03,480
Speaker 2: Members were the biggest supporters of an early release. Now

67
00:04:03,600 --> 00:04:06,560
Speaker 2: all the family members but seemingly one who passed away,

68
00:04:06,920 --> 00:04:10,200
Speaker 2: wanted them out early. But the district attorney does not

69
00:04:10,280 --> 00:04:13,560
Speaker 2: represent the victims, does not represent the family members. They

70
00:04:13,600 --> 00:04:17,159
Speaker 2: represent the people. That's why it's usually the people versus

71
00:04:17,279 --> 00:04:21,440
Speaker 2: Menendez or the state versus Menendez. And in this case,

72
00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:24,599
Speaker 2: the decision of the district attorney was that it is

73
00:04:24,640 --> 00:04:27,919
Speaker 2: in the interest of the people of California that the

74
00:04:27,960 --> 00:04:30,080
Speaker 2: Menendez brothers stay behind bars.

75
00:04:30,440 --> 00:04:35,280
Speaker 3: They've been described as model prisoners who helped other prisoners

76
00:04:35,320 --> 00:04:39,840
Speaker 3: by setting up programs. Were they ever accused of violence

77
00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:42,520
Speaker 3: or other infractions.

78
00:04:42,440 --> 00:04:45,240
Speaker 2: Well, there was a report that showed that they did

79
00:04:45,600 --> 00:04:49,800
Speaker 2: have contraband inside the prison, which was cell phone and

80
00:04:49,960 --> 00:04:54,080
Speaker 2: potential drugs. That's part of a report. And whether or

81
00:04:54,080 --> 00:04:57,479
Speaker 2: not that means they have not been reformed. Well, when

82
00:04:57,480 --> 00:05:00,480
Speaker 2: it comes to violence, they clearly did not to commit

83
00:05:00,520 --> 00:05:04,320
Speaker 2: anything like that in prison. They were different people behind bars.

84
00:05:04,360 --> 00:05:06,400
Speaker 2: They helped others, But yet there are a lot of

85
00:05:06,400 --> 00:05:11,239
Speaker 2: people who find God behind bars. And they help others

86
00:05:11,279 --> 00:05:13,800
Speaker 2: and they don't get released early from a life sentence.

87
00:05:13,839 --> 00:05:16,240
Speaker 2: So it seems that the celebrity in this case, the

88
00:05:16,279 --> 00:05:18,240
Speaker 2: power of celebrity made a real difference.

89
00:05:18,400 --> 00:05:22,080
Speaker 3: I wonder if this would have happened if you hadn't

90
00:05:22,120 --> 00:05:26,599
Speaker 3: had that Netflix documentary that sort of introduced a whole

91
00:05:26,680 --> 00:05:31,480
Speaker 3: new generation to the Menendez brothers in a sympathetic way.

92
00:05:32,120 --> 00:05:35,320
Speaker 2: I agree the power of streaming, the power of celebrity.

93
00:05:35,760 --> 00:05:38,440
Speaker 2: I think the Menendez brothers became a cause celeb and

94
00:05:38,480 --> 00:05:41,600
Speaker 2: as a result, they got some benefits from it. They

95
00:05:41,640 --> 00:05:43,960
Speaker 2: got all this worldwide attention, They had the best lawyers

96
00:05:44,320 --> 00:05:47,120
Speaker 2: possible for them, and they were able to convince the

97
00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:50,240
Speaker 2: district attorney to side with them to get a resentencing.

98
00:05:50,440 --> 00:05:53,279
Speaker 2: And then that district attorney lost the election, but the

99
00:05:53,360 --> 00:05:56,600
Speaker 2: judge went ahead with it anyways, And now it's up

100
00:05:56,600 --> 00:05:58,920
Speaker 2: to the pearle board and the governor, and I think

101
00:05:58,960 --> 00:06:01,200
Speaker 2: they will be let out early. I don't think there

102
00:06:01,200 --> 00:06:04,360
Speaker 2: are any risk of reoffending any violent crime. I think

103
00:06:04,520 --> 00:06:07,720
Speaker 2: they did give reform behind prison walls. But on the

104
00:06:07,760 --> 00:06:09,960
Speaker 2: other hand, how many other people in their situation get

105
00:06:09,960 --> 00:06:12,400
Speaker 2: this benefit, get sentence to life in prison and they

106
00:06:12,400 --> 00:06:16,880
Speaker 2: get out early because they were good prisoners, not many,

107
00:06:17,200 --> 00:06:21,160
Speaker 2: but this case was treated differently because of the celebrity involved,

108
00:06:21,200 --> 00:06:23,640
Speaker 2: because of the notoriety, and that's the issue I have.

109
00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:26,440
Speaker 2: I just don't think they were treated like everyone else.

110
00:06:26,520 --> 00:06:30,760
Speaker 3: But in their second trial, the judge limited the testimony

111
00:06:31,040 --> 00:06:35,479
Speaker 3: about the allegations of abuse, and it's possible the jury

112
00:06:35,520 --> 00:06:38,719
Speaker 3: would have come out with a verdict of manslaughter instead

113
00:06:38,720 --> 00:06:42,440
Speaker 3: of murder if the abuse allegations had gotten a full hearing.

114
00:06:42,920 --> 00:06:45,160
Speaker 2: Well, that was a judge's determination at the time, and

115
00:06:45,240 --> 00:06:47,640
Speaker 2: the crimes were not overturned on appeal. I mean, the

116
00:06:47,680 --> 00:06:49,719
Speaker 2: proper venue if you think that the judge made a

117
00:06:49,760 --> 00:06:52,440
Speaker 2: bad decision is to appeal it. But the appellate courts

118
00:06:52,480 --> 00:06:54,640
Speaker 2: did not agree, thought that they got a fair trial.

119
00:06:55,000 --> 00:06:57,960
Speaker 2: And as far as being led out, the real reason

120
00:06:58,000 --> 00:06:59,720
Speaker 2: why they're being led out of at least according to

121
00:06:59,720 --> 00:07:02,839
Speaker 2: the pres was because of their good behavior behind bars.

122
00:07:03,000 --> 00:07:06,320
Speaker 3: The DA Hawkman had complained over and over that they

123
00:07:06,360 --> 00:07:11,000
Speaker 3: hadn't taken responsibility for the crimes, but both brothers made

124
00:07:11,080 --> 00:07:16,720
Speaker 3: these remarkable statements accepting full responsibility for the murders.

125
00:07:17,040 --> 00:07:19,320
Speaker 1: Lyle said that all the choices.

126
00:07:18,880 --> 00:07:22,480
Speaker 3: He made were his own, including quote the choice to reload,

127
00:07:22,640 --> 00:07:24,920
Speaker 3: returned to the den and run up to my mother

128
00:07:25,000 --> 00:07:27,360
Speaker 3: and shoot her in the head, and he apologized for

129
00:07:27,480 --> 00:07:30,760
Speaker 3: making a mockery of the criminal legal system by lying.

130
00:07:31,360 --> 00:07:33,640
Speaker 3: Does that seem like the kind of apology that the

131
00:07:33,800 --> 00:07:35,280
Speaker 3: LADA was looking for?

132
00:07:35,960 --> 00:07:39,480
Speaker 2: It does, and that's something that I thought has been underreported.

133
00:07:39,520 --> 00:07:42,120
Speaker 2: I'm glad you brought it up, Jin, because Hawkman had

134
00:07:42,200 --> 00:07:45,560
Speaker 2: asked for a real apology, said enough of this abuse.

135
00:07:45,680 --> 00:07:48,960
Speaker 2: Excuse take responsibility for your actions. Stop saying that you

136
00:07:49,000 --> 00:07:51,320
Speaker 2: had to kill your parents because they would have killed

137
00:07:51,360 --> 00:07:51,800
Speaker 2: you first.

138
00:07:51,840 --> 00:07:53,080
Speaker 7: That was a lie all along.

139
00:07:53,400 --> 00:07:57,600
Speaker 2: And I do believe with their statements that they went

140
00:07:57,640 --> 00:08:01,360
Speaker 2: a long way towards meeting Hawkman request, and that's why

141
00:08:01,560 --> 00:08:03,520
Speaker 2: I think that they will be released earlier. I do

142
00:08:03,560 --> 00:08:06,680
Speaker 2: think that this was as close to a full fledged

143
00:08:06,880 --> 00:08:11,760
Speaker 2: apology acknowledgment of guilt that we have ever seen from them.

144
00:08:11,800 --> 00:08:14,880
Speaker 2: It was something different than before, and I think that's

145
00:08:14,920 --> 00:08:16,239
Speaker 2: going to lead to their early release.

146
00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:19,640
Speaker 3: The judge called the crime shocking. He said he was

147
00:08:19,680 --> 00:08:23,160
Speaker 3: also shocked by the number of Corrections officials who wrote

148
00:08:23,280 --> 00:08:26,000
Speaker 3: letters on behalf of the brothers, and that seemed to

149
00:08:26,040 --> 00:08:28,160
Speaker 3: be an important part of his decision.

150
00:08:28,840 --> 00:08:32,640
Speaker 2: It was something that corrections officials and family members all

151
00:08:32,720 --> 00:08:34,880
Speaker 2: sided with them, and I do think the celebrity part

152
00:08:34,880 --> 00:08:36,720
Speaker 2: of it has something to do with it. The Netflix

153
00:08:36,720 --> 00:08:40,320
Speaker 2: shows the movement behind them. Yeah, I think that did

154
00:08:40,360 --> 00:08:43,080
Speaker 2: persuade people. But you know, I do think also there's

155
00:08:43,120 --> 00:08:46,280
Speaker 2: really little doubt that they are different people today than

156
00:08:46,280 --> 00:08:49,200
Speaker 2: they were back then. They were real, spoiled, selfish kids

157
00:08:49,200 --> 00:08:52,360
Speaker 2: who acted in a brutal, horrific way. I mean the

158
00:08:52,400 --> 00:08:55,600
Speaker 2: fact that the mother, who did not engage in sexual

159
00:08:55,640 --> 00:08:58,400
Speaker 2: abuse but may have helped cover it up. She was

160
00:08:58,559 --> 00:09:01,640
Speaker 2: crawling away after being shot by a shotgun, and then

161
00:09:01,800 --> 00:09:05,880
Speaker 2: the brothers went outside to reload to continue to come

162
00:09:05,920 --> 00:09:08,600
Speaker 2: in and shoot her ten times in putting in the face.

163
00:09:08,800 --> 00:09:11,480
Speaker 2: There was so much blood that the cops thought this

164
00:09:11,559 --> 00:09:15,440
Speaker 2: was a mafia hit, and yet they lied about everything.

165
00:09:15,520 --> 00:09:18,480
Speaker 2: They went on a spending spree. Only after spending seven

166
00:09:18,520 --> 00:09:21,600
Speaker 2: hundred thousand dollars in quick turn did they attract the

167
00:09:21,640 --> 00:09:25,280
Speaker 2: attention of law enforcement and then were eventually arrested. But

168
00:09:26,160 --> 00:09:27,720
Speaker 2: they got away with it for a while. They got

169
00:09:27,720 --> 00:09:30,640
Speaker 2: what they wanted, and I thought they deserved their sentence.

170
00:09:30,720 --> 00:09:34,160
Speaker 2: But you know, they are reformed and if the system

171
00:09:34,240 --> 00:09:37,000
Speaker 2: lets them out early. I don't think they will reoffend.

172
00:09:36,640 --> 00:09:39,360
Speaker 3: But a risk assessment by the Parole Board found there

173
00:09:39,480 --> 00:09:43,600
Speaker 3: was a moderate risk of them committing a crime if released,

174
00:09:44,120 --> 00:09:48,199
Speaker 3: although the judge said that the legal presumption is in

175
00:09:48,280 --> 00:09:53,200
Speaker 3: favor of resentencing unless there was an unreasonable risk that

176
00:09:53,320 --> 00:09:57,480
Speaker 3: they would commit a so called super strike crime such

177
00:09:57,520 --> 00:09:58,720
Speaker 3: as rape or murder.

178
00:09:59,240 --> 00:10:01,760
Speaker 2: That was actually eyes when I saw that moderate risk,

179
00:10:01,920 --> 00:10:03,719
Speaker 2: I don't think they will reoffend me. There's so many

180
00:10:03,760 --> 00:10:05,439
Speaker 2: eyeballs on these guys. They're going to go on the

181
00:10:05,480 --> 00:10:08,920
Speaker 2: speaking circuit, They're going to go to reality shows. I mean,

182
00:10:08,960 --> 00:10:11,240
Speaker 2: I think it's unfair because they're going to be treated

183
00:10:11,320 --> 00:10:13,400
Speaker 2: in a way that others are not. They're going to

184
00:10:13,440 --> 00:10:16,120
Speaker 2: get super celebrity and make a lot of money off this,

185
00:10:16,400 --> 00:10:18,960
Speaker 2: and no one should profit off their infamy.

186
00:10:19,520 --> 00:10:22,640
Speaker 3: There are several tracks that would allow them to be released.

187
00:10:23,400 --> 00:10:27,160
Speaker 3: Parole from the parole Board or clemency from the governor

188
00:10:27,720 --> 00:10:31,240
Speaker 3: seem the most likely. I mean, to get parole, they

189
00:10:31,320 --> 00:10:36,520
Speaker 3: have to take responsibility for their crimes and show they're

190
00:10:36,640 --> 00:10:41,160
Speaker 3: unlikely to reoffend, which is basically what the judge considered.

191
00:10:41,559 --> 00:10:44,240
Speaker 2: I do think that the two tracks will lead to

192
00:10:44,320 --> 00:10:45,280
Speaker 2: their early release.

193
00:10:45,400 --> 00:10:46,800
Speaker 7: Whether it's the.

194
00:10:46,400 --> 00:10:50,120
Speaker 2: Governor Newsom track of the clemency Board and then signed

195
00:10:50,120 --> 00:10:52,200
Speaker 2: by the Governor or the Parole Board, which is what

196
00:10:52,280 --> 00:10:55,120
Speaker 2: the judge just tantioned. So either way, I think they're

197
00:10:55,120 --> 00:10:56,240
Speaker 2: headed towards the release.

198
00:10:57,000 --> 00:11:01,960
Speaker 3: Their first Parole Board hearing is set for June thirteenth.

199
00:11:01,440 --> 00:11:03,600
Speaker 1: And if the Parole Board does.

200
00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:07,160
Speaker 3: Deny parole, it has to do so for a period

201
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:11,160
Speaker 3: of three, five, seven, ten or fifteen years, So it

202
00:11:11,200 --> 00:11:13,600
Speaker 3: could deny parole and then say, well, come back in

203
00:11:13,679 --> 00:11:14,880
Speaker 3: three years.

204
00:11:15,080 --> 00:11:17,000
Speaker 2: I would think that would be probably the best case

205
00:11:17,040 --> 00:11:19,640
Speaker 2: scenario for those who want, I Meananda's brothers to stay

206
00:11:19,640 --> 00:11:23,240
Speaker 2: behind bars. I do not envision them remaining behind bars

207
00:11:23,320 --> 00:11:26,360
Speaker 2: that much longer, so three years maybe the outer limit.

208
00:11:26,640 --> 00:11:30,760
Speaker 3: There's also a Habeas Corpus petition they file back in

209
00:11:30,840 --> 00:11:33,640
Speaker 3: twenty twenty three, seeking a new trial.

210
00:11:34,280 --> 00:11:37,120
Speaker 2: That was always the most unlikely thing to happen. Of

211
00:11:37,160 --> 00:11:39,040
Speaker 2: the three real choice. They had the resented thing, they

212
00:11:39,040 --> 00:11:41,320
Speaker 2: had the clemency, and then they had the Habeast, but

213
00:11:41,360 --> 00:11:42,880
Speaker 2: the Habeasts was sort of a dead end.

214
00:11:42,880 --> 00:11:43,720
Speaker 7: The other two.

215
00:11:43,520 --> 00:11:47,520
Speaker 2: Though, for Fruit and I think that that's going to

216
00:11:47,600 --> 00:11:48,640
Speaker 2: lead to their early release.

217
00:11:48,800 --> 00:11:52,880
Speaker 3: The Habeas Corpus petition was based on two new pieces

218
00:11:52,920 --> 00:11:56,400
Speaker 3: of evidence. Did that new evidence play any part in

219
00:11:56,520 --> 00:11:57,800
Speaker 3: Judge Jesseic's decision.

220
00:11:58,320 --> 00:12:01,640
Speaker 2: I think it did because the judge took everything into account.

221
00:12:01,760 --> 00:12:03,560
Speaker 2: It was more than the good behavior. It was the

222
00:12:03,559 --> 00:12:06,120
Speaker 2: fact that there was evidence that the sexual abuse from

223
00:12:06,160 --> 00:12:10,120
Speaker 2: Jose did occur. Not conclusive evidence, but we had a

224
00:12:10,200 --> 00:12:12,440
Speaker 2: letter that one of the Menanda's brothers wrote to a

225
00:12:12,480 --> 00:12:15,760
Speaker 2: cousin that mentioned it. There was also the Menudo boy

226
00:12:15,800 --> 00:12:18,560
Speaker 2: band member who said that Jose engaged in sexual abuse

227
00:12:18,600 --> 00:12:20,240
Speaker 2: with him. So yeah, there is evidence.

228
00:12:20,280 --> 00:12:23,160
Speaker 3: So they have several hurdles ahead of them. Even if

229
00:12:23,160 --> 00:12:26,800
Speaker 3: the parole board finds them eligible for parole, there's still

230
00:12:26,800 --> 00:12:29,760
Speaker 3: going to be a ninety day review period during which

231
00:12:29,800 --> 00:12:31,480
Speaker 3: the governor could block their release.

232
00:12:31,800 --> 00:12:33,680
Speaker 1: So more to come. Thanks so much, Dave.

233
00:12:33,920 --> 00:12:37,439
Speaker 3: That's Dave Arenberg, former Palm Beach County State Attorney. I'm

234
00:12:37,520 --> 00:12:40,880
Speaker 3: June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. The rid of

235
00:12:40,920 --> 00:12:45,280
Speaker 3: habeas corpus is a bedrock American legal right embedded in

236
00:12:45,280 --> 00:12:49,240
Speaker 3: the Constitution. Yet White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen

237
00:12:49,320 --> 00:12:53,439
Speaker 3: Miller said the administration has been actively looking at suspending

238
00:12:53,520 --> 00:12:55,480
Speaker 3: habeas corpus unilaterally.

239
00:12:55,840 --> 00:12:58,000
Speaker 8: Well, the Constitution is clear, and that, of course is

240
00:12:58,040 --> 00:13:01,959
Speaker 8: the supreme law of the land that the privilege of

241
00:13:02,000 --> 00:13:04,640
Speaker 8: the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a

242
00:13:04,640 --> 00:13:06,800
Speaker 8: time of invasion. So it would say that's an option

243
00:13:06,840 --> 00:13:09,480
Speaker 8: we're actively looking at. Look, a lot of it depends

244
00:13:09,559 --> 00:13:11,840
Speaker 8: on whether the course do the right thing or not.

245
00:13:12,200 --> 00:13:16,040
Speaker 3: Habeas corpus has only been suspended four times in our

246
00:13:16,160 --> 00:13:21,040
Speaker 3: nation's history, essentially in times of war or insurrection. My

247
00:13:21,080 --> 00:13:24,720
Speaker 3: guest is an expert in constitutional law. Jonathan Adler, a

248
00:13:24,800 --> 00:13:28,160
Speaker 3: professor at Case Western Reserve Law School, tell us about

249
00:13:28,160 --> 00:13:30,320
Speaker 3: the history of the writ of habeas corpus.

250
00:13:30,840 --> 00:13:31,600
Speaker 7: So, the writ of.

251
00:13:31,600 --> 00:13:35,240
Speaker 6: Habeas corpus traces its way back to the Magna Carta. Literally,

252
00:13:35,320 --> 00:13:38,560
Speaker 6: habeas corpus is a declaration that you have the body.

253
00:13:38,600 --> 00:13:43,360
Speaker 6: The idea is that you're challenging the alleged unlawful detention

254
00:13:43,640 --> 00:13:46,240
Speaker 6: of someone by the government. The writ of habeas corpus

255
00:13:46,280 --> 00:13:50,000
Speaker 6: has been recognized going back to the seventeenth century as

256
00:13:50,040 --> 00:13:53,000
Speaker 6: a way of challenging in England, at least the king's

257
00:13:53,040 --> 00:13:55,960
Speaker 6: right to incarcerate people, and in the United States, the

258
00:13:56,000 --> 00:13:58,840
Speaker 6: rit of habeas corpus is a way to challenge either

259
00:13:58,880 --> 00:14:02,480
Speaker 6: a conviction or the government's detention of an individual on

260
00:14:02,559 --> 00:14:05,120
Speaker 6: the grounds that it is not consistent with law. So

261
00:14:05,200 --> 00:14:07,280
Speaker 6: in the case of a conviction, we see rits of

262
00:14:07,280 --> 00:14:10,800
Speaker 6: habeas corpus filed by people who have been convicted of crimes,

263
00:14:10,840 --> 00:14:13,240
Speaker 6: often people who have been sentenced to the capital punishment,

264
00:14:13,679 --> 00:14:17,160
Speaker 6: challenging the regularity or the lawfulness of the proceedings through

265
00:14:17,160 --> 00:14:19,560
Speaker 6: which they are convicted, and then through a habeas corpus

266
00:14:19,640 --> 00:14:22,080
Speaker 6: can be filed in cases where, for example, someone is

267
00:14:22,120 --> 00:14:24,760
Speaker 6: alleging that the basis upon which they have been detained

268
00:14:24,840 --> 00:14:28,160
Speaker 6: or arrested is unlawful. So we've seen this with alleged

269
00:14:28,200 --> 00:14:31,000
Speaker 6: enemy combatants, and we're seeing it now with individuals who

270
00:14:31,000 --> 00:14:33,720
Speaker 6: are alleged to be unlawfully present in the country or

271
00:14:33,720 --> 00:14:35,400
Speaker 6: potentially subject to deportation.

272
00:14:35,920 --> 00:14:40,560
Speaker 3: The section of the US Constitution that includes the suspension

273
00:14:40,600 --> 00:14:44,880
Speaker 3: of habeas corpus grants its powers to Congress and not

274
00:14:45,040 --> 00:14:45,760
Speaker 3: the President.

275
00:14:46,240 --> 00:14:49,080
Speaker 6: Well, that is the way we've generally interpreted what we

276
00:14:49,160 --> 00:14:52,360
Speaker 6: call the suspension clause. So Article one, section nine, which

277
00:14:52,360 --> 00:14:55,440
Speaker 6: is a portion of the Constitution that identifies limits on

278
00:14:55,520 --> 00:14:58,560
Speaker 6: Congress's power, has a clause that we refer to as

279
00:14:58,560 --> 00:15:01,880
Speaker 6: the suspension clause reads, the privilege of the writ of

280
00:15:01,880 --> 00:15:05,640
Speaker 6: habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when in cases

281
00:15:05,640 --> 00:15:08,960
Speaker 6: of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it.

282
00:15:09,200 --> 00:15:11,600
Speaker 6: And given that it is in Article one, Section nine,

283
00:15:11,640 --> 00:15:14,440
Speaker 6: it has always been interpreted as placing a limitation on

284
00:15:14,560 --> 00:15:18,080
Speaker 6: Congress's ability to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, and

285
00:15:18,120 --> 00:15:22,200
Speaker 6: that interpretation goes all the way back to eighteen oh seven.

286
00:15:22,480 --> 00:15:24,600
Speaker 6: Is the first time Supreme Court, in an opinion by

287
00:15:24,720 --> 00:15:28,840
Speaker 6: Chief Justice Martial, indicated the understanding this is Congress's authority

288
00:15:28,880 --> 00:15:32,920
Speaker 6: to decide that habeas corpus can be suspended, and historically,

289
00:15:33,000 --> 00:15:35,680
Speaker 6: with one exception, when the writ of habeas corpus has

290
00:15:35,760 --> 00:15:39,160
Speaker 6: been suspended, it has either been suspended by Congress or

291
00:15:39,160 --> 00:15:42,520
Speaker 6: Congress has delegated to the President the authority to suspend

292
00:15:42,560 --> 00:15:44,560
Speaker 6: the writ in specified circumstances.

293
00:15:44,920 --> 00:15:51,200
Speaker 3: That interpretation of habeas corpus has been affirmed in Supreme

294
00:15:51,240 --> 00:15:53,800
Speaker 3: Court opinions in modern times.

295
00:15:54,040 --> 00:15:54,400
Speaker 7: Yes so.

296
00:15:54,680 --> 00:15:57,440
Speaker 6: For example, in the case of Homdi, which was a

297
00:15:57,480 --> 00:16:01,160
Speaker 6: case involving an individual and American citizen who was allegedly

298
00:16:01,320 --> 00:16:04,800
Speaker 6: captured in Afghanistan as a writer with the Taliban. He

299
00:16:04,960 --> 00:16:07,840
Speaker 6: was brought to the United States, and he filed oposition

300
00:16:08,040 --> 00:16:10,040
Speaker 6: for writ of habeas corpus. The question was whether or

301
00:16:10,080 --> 00:16:12,440
Speaker 6: not he could be detained in the United States without

302
00:16:12,440 --> 00:16:14,440
Speaker 6: being subject to trial, and if one goes through the

303
00:16:14,440 --> 00:16:17,960
Speaker 6: opinions in that case, While justices disagreed on a lot

304
00:16:17,960 --> 00:16:20,920
Speaker 6: of questions about what sort of process mister Hamdi was

305
00:16:21,080 --> 00:16:24,360
Speaker 6: entitled to and what other constitutional protections he deserved, all

306
00:16:24,440 --> 00:16:27,280
Speaker 6: of the opinions operated on the premise that if the

307
00:16:27,280 --> 00:16:30,120
Speaker 6: writ of habeas corpus was to be suspended, it had

308
00:16:30,160 --> 00:16:32,880
Speaker 6: to be done so pursuant to an Act of Congress

309
00:16:32,960 --> 00:16:36,120
Speaker 6: subsequent to that in a case called Boomagen also involving

310
00:16:36,240 --> 00:16:39,240
Speaker 6: alleged enemy combatant from the majority opinion of the Supreme

311
00:16:39,240 --> 00:16:41,760
Speaker 6: Court in that case made clear that this is a

312
00:16:41,880 --> 00:16:44,600
Speaker 6: check on executive power. That the writ of habeas corpus

313
00:16:44,760 --> 00:16:47,040
Speaker 6: often in this sort of context serves as a check

314
00:16:47,120 --> 00:16:49,640
Speaker 6: on executive power, and it obviously could not serve that

315
00:16:49,720 --> 00:16:53,400
Speaker 6: function if the executive branch could unilaterally just decide to

316
00:16:53,440 --> 00:16:54,000
Speaker 6: suspend it.

317
00:16:54,440 --> 00:16:58,960
Speaker 3: So, if the Trump administration actually did decide to suspend

318
00:16:59,040 --> 00:17:05,040
Speaker 3: habeas corpus unilaterally, would that definitely constitute a constitutional crisis.

319
00:17:05,359 --> 00:17:07,240
Speaker 6: Well, two things first, I think when one looks at

320
00:17:07,359 --> 00:17:10,600
Speaker 6: Miller's comments, I think he was perhaps being very careful.

321
00:17:10,640 --> 00:17:13,919
Speaker 6: He said they were looking at the option of the

322
00:17:13,960 --> 00:17:16,560
Speaker 6: privilege of the Writ of habeas corpus being suspended. He

323
00:17:16,600 --> 00:17:18,800
Speaker 6: did not say whether the executive branch was going to

324
00:17:18,800 --> 00:17:20,960
Speaker 6: try and do that unilaterally, or whether they were going

325
00:17:21,000 --> 00:17:23,000
Speaker 6: to ask Congress to do it. My own view is

326
00:17:23,040 --> 00:17:25,119
Speaker 6: they can look at it all they want, because if

327
00:17:25,160 --> 00:17:27,240
Speaker 6: they do look at it, they'll realize that they do

328
00:17:27,320 --> 00:17:30,200
Speaker 6: not have the authority to do it unilaterally. The one

329
00:17:30,200 --> 00:17:33,159
Speaker 6: time the executive branch did suspend the Writ of habeas

330
00:17:33,200 --> 00:17:37,280
Speaker 6: corpus unilaterally was during the Civil War when President Lincoln

331
00:17:37,480 --> 00:17:40,320
Speaker 6: suspended the writ in Baltimore out of a concern that

332
00:17:40,440 --> 00:17:43,240
Speaker 6: rail lines to the nation's capital would be severed or

333
00:17:43,280 --> 00:17:46,719
Speaker 6: blocked and that would lead to the fall of Washington,

334
00:17:46,800 --> 00:17:50,360
Speaker 6: d c. To Confederate forces. And even that in such

335
00:17:50,359 --> 00:17:53,280
Speaker 6: an extreme circumstance, when the nation was in civil war,

336
00:17:53,359 --> 00:17:56,359
Speaker 6: when there were hostile troops threatening the nation's capital, even

337
00:17:56,400 --> 00:17:59,840
Speaker 6: that was recognized as an extreme action. It's one that

338
00:18:00,040 --> 00:18:04,520
Speaker 6: Congress later ratified, but most people accept was not consistent

339
00:18:04,600 --> 00:18:08,720
Speaker 6: with the constitution structure. So if the administration were to

340
00:18:08,760 --> 00:18:11,880
Speaker 6: try to suspend the Writ of abeas Corpus, not particularly

341
00:18:11,920 --> 00:18:14,800
Speaker 6: doubtful that courts would conclude that that was unlawful, that

342
00:18:14,800 --> 00:18:17,680
Speaker 6: the administration lacks that authority, and I think they would

343
00:18:17,720 --> 00:18:20,359
Speaker 6: primarily do so on the grounds that it's just not

344
00:18:20,560 --> 00:18:24,320
Speaker 6: something the executive branch can do within US territory during

345
00:18:24,320 --> 00:18:27,480
Speaker 6: peace time. That there's no question that the executive branch

346
00:18:27,560 --> 00:18:31,360
Speaker 6: does not have that sort of unilateral authority. The more

347
00:18:31,359 --> 00:18:35,359
Speaker 6: interesting thought experiment would be what if the administration could

348
00:18:35,400 --> 00:18:39,560
Speaker 6: convince Congress to suspend the Writ. And as I noted before,

349
00:18:39,640 --> 00:18:43,440
Speaker 6: the language of the suspension clause refers to the reasons

350
00:18:43,800 --> 00:18:46,320
Speaker 6: why the Writ could be suspended. It says that it

351
00:18:46,359 --> 00:18:49,240
Speaker 6: shall not be suspended unless when in cases of rebellion

352
00:18:49,359 --> 00:18:53,439
Speaker 6: or invasion. And so hypothetically, if the administration were to

353
00:18:53,920 --> 00:18:58,160
Speaker 6: convince Congress that illegal immigration is such that it constitutes

354
00:18:58,200 --> 00:19:01,080
Speaker 6: an invasion and Congress words spend the Writ, there is

355
00:19:01,119 --> 00:19:04,360
Speaker 6: an interesting question about whether or not that judgment by

356
00:19:04,440 --> 00:19:07,520
Speaker 6: Congress would be subject to judicial review. I think the

357
00:19:07,600 --> 00:19:11,480
Speaker 6: prevailing wisdom is that whether or not Article one, Section

358
00:19:11,560 --> 00:19:14,280
Speaker 6: nine requirements have been met would be a non justiciable

359
00:19:14,280 --> 00:19:17,960
Speaker 6: political question. But that's really just a thought experiment, because

360
00:19:18,119 --> 00:19:22,040
Speaker 6: that would require Congress passing legislation to suspend the WRIT,

361
00:19:22,080 --> 00:19:24,639
Speaker 6: and it's pretty clear with the margins in Congress right

362
00:19:24,680 --> 00:19:27,359
Speaker 6: now that's not something that is even remotely likely.

363
00:19:27,680 --> 00:19:32,040
Speaker 3: The grounds that they refer to for suspending the WRIT

364
00:19:32,480 --> 00:19:35,360
Speaker 3: are the same grounds basically that they referred to for

365
00:19:35,480 --> 00:19:39,520
Speaker 3: invoking the Alien Enemies Act, and at least four federal

366
00:19:39,600 --> 00:19:44,040
Speaker 3: judges have found that America isn't facing an invasion by

367
00:19:44,320 --> 00:19:48,640
Speaker 3: undocumented migrants. The Supreme Court hasn't weighed in yet on

368
00:19:48,760 --> 00:19:52,960
Speaker 3: whether the administration can deport people under the Alien Enemies Act,

369
00:19:53,160 --> 00:19:56,240
Speaker 3: but for a second time on Friday, the Justices said

370
00:19:56,640 --> 00:20:00,480
Speaker 3: the detainees have to be given due process, a chance

371
00:20:00,560 --> 00:20:04,040
Speaker 3: to challenge their deportations by a rid of habeas corpus.

372
00:20:04,520 --> 00:20:07,720
Speaker 6: So the Trump administration is being required to allow the

373
00:20:07,800 --> 00:20:11,399
Speaker 6: individuals attained to file petitions for Brits of abeas corpus,

374
00:20:11,480 --> 00:20:14,280
Speaker 6: and I expect that would continue. In the background here,

375
00:20:14,440 --> 00:20:17,639
Speaker 6: there is this long standing notion that certain questions relating

376
00:20:17,640 --> 00:20:20,679
Speaker 6: to national security, perhaps even some relating to the border,

377
00:20:20,920 --> 00:20:23,560
Speaker 6: are what we refer to as political questions, questions that

378
00:20:23,720 --> 00:20:27,160
Speaker 6: are resolved by the political branches not by courts, And

379
00:20:27,400 --> 00:20:30,199
Speaker 6: in so far as these questions touch on that, the

380
00:20:30,280 --> 00:20:32,280
Speaker 6: role that courts have played is to make sure that

381
00:20:32,320 --> 00:20:36,080
Speaker 6: the legislature and the executive branch each perform their respective functions,

382
00:20:36,359 --> 00:20:40,280
Speaker 6: but to not second guess their determination. So, if Congress

383
00:20:40,280 --> 00:20:44,080
Speaker 6: were to conclude that waves of the illegal immigration are

384
00:20:44,440 --> 00:20:46,720
Speaker 6: at least potentially in an invasion for purposes of the

385
00:20:46,760 --> 00:20:50,840
Speaker 6: suspension clause, you know, I suspect courts would allow that

386
00:20:51,320 --> 00:20:54,840
Speaker 6: to stand, not because they would be saying Congress is correct,

387
00:20:54,920 --> 00:20:57,640
Speaker 6: but because they would be saying, the courts don't get

388
00:20:57,760 --> 00:21:00,919
Speaker 6: to second guess that. Now, having said all that, I

389
00:21:00,920 --> 00:21:03,800
Speaker 6: don't think there is any question as a historical matter

390
00:21:04,200 --> 00:21:07,840
Speaker 6: that illegal immigration, even at far higher rates than we

391
00:21:07,880 --> 00:21:11,760
Speaker 6: see now, would not constitute an invasion for purposes of

392
00:21:11,800 --> 00:21:15,440
Speaker 6: that clause. The language of the suspension clause is invoking

393
00:21:15,480 --> 00:21:18,359
Speaker 6: the idea that there are certain situations, such as rebellion

394
00:21:18,560 --> 00:21:21,760
Speaker 6: or an invasion by an invading army, that create a

395
00:21:21,800 --> 00:21:25,000
Speaker 6: situation in which, in effect, the courts are not open.

396
00:21:25,280 --> 00:21:27,919
Speaker 6: So the idea has been that if martial law, for example,

397
00:21:27,960 --> 00:21:32,040
Speaker 6: is declared, that effectively tells the courts to stop operations,

398
00:21:32,160 --> 00:21:34,719
Speaker 6: the writ of habeas corpus when it is suspended by

399
00:21:34,720 --> 00:21:38,000
Speaker 6: the legislature. That's typically because it's not safe or possible

400
00:21:38,080 --> 00:21:41,040
Speaker 6: for the courts to engage in their normal functioning. That

401
00:21:41,280 --> 00:21:45,480
Speaker 6: is the sort of invasion that Article one, section nine contemplates,

402
00:21:45,640 --> 00:21:48,960
Speaker 6: not higher numbers of people crossing the border than perhaps

403
00:21:49,000 --> 00:21:51,679
Speaker 6: Congress might like. So I don't think there's any question

404
00:21:51,760 --> 00:21:54,120
Speaker 6: that as a textual matter or as a historical matter,

405
00:21:54,160 --> 00:21:57,120
Speaker 6: that the clause would not be satisfied. But there is

406
00:21:57,160 --> 00:22:00,520
Speaker 6: this question about whether or not it's something that courts

407
00:22:00,560 --> 00:22:03,120
Speaker 6: can properly issue a decision on, as opposed to leaving

408
00:22:03,160 --> 00:22:06,240
Speaker 6: it to the interplay between the executive and the legislature.

409
00:22:06,640 --> 00:22:10,040
Speaker 3: Did you hear a subtle threat to judges in Miller's comments?

410
00:22:10,480 --> 00:22:14,439
Speaker 3: He said, these radical rogue judges are at war with

411
00:22:14,560 --> 00:22:18,920
Speaker 3: the executive branch and the legislative branch, and the administration's

412
00:22:19,000 --> 00:22:23,760
Speaker 3: decision on whether to suspend habeas corpus depends a lot

413
00:22:23,920 --> 00:22:26,879
Speaker 3: on whether the courts do the right thing or not.

414
00:22:27,400 --> 00:22:30,040
Speaker 6: Yeah, so, I mean, you know, Steve Miller's not a lawyer,

415
00:22:30,240 --> 00:22:34,520
Speaker 6: but he is someone that often speaks about legal issues

416
00:22:34,600 --> 00:22:38,280
Speaker 6: for the administration and often says things that aren't quite right.

417
00:22:38,320 --> 00:22:41,320
Speaker 6: As a legal matter, but I think do echo the

418
00:22:41,359 --> 00:22:45,480
Speaker 6: message that the administration wants to send, particularly to its base.

419
00:22:45,840 --> 00:22:49,159
Speaker 6: I think in this sort of context, there is this

420
00:22:49,280 --> 00:22:53,040
Speaker 6: implicit threat, or this very adversarial posture to the Court's

421
00:22:53,040 --> 00:22:55,800
Speaker 6: suggestion that of courts don't cooperate, or if the courts

422
00:22:55,840 --> 00:23:00,480
Speaker 6: obstruct the administration's agenda, the administration will look forward to

423
00:23:00,600 --> 00:23:03,480
Speaker 6: push back in an extreme way, and this certainly could

424
00:23:03,520 --> 00:23:06,959
Speaker 6: be one of them. I'm not entirely sure this is

425
00:23:07,240 --> 00:23:11,240
Speaker 6: an effective strategy for the administration. I mean, certainly, I

426
00:23:11,280 --> 00:23:14,560
Speaker 6: can't imagine lawyers who work in the administration making these

427
00:23:14,600 --> 00:23:17,600
Speaker 6: sorts of comments publicly, certainly not the lawyers that have

428
00:23:17,680 --> 00:23:20,520
Speaker 6: to themselves appear in court. And it's not clear to

429
00:23:20,560 --> 00:23:23,639
Speaker 6: me that these sorts of comments are helpful, and I

430
00:23:23,800 --> 00:23:27,359
Speaker 6: doubt they do much to change the way judges evaluate

431
00:23:27,600 --> 00:23:30,200
Speaker 6: these sorts of claims. In fact, in some cases, they

432
00:23:30,280 --> 00:23:34,520
Speaker 6: might even undermine the administration's position insofar as they suggest

433
00:23:34,560 --> 00:23:37,239
Speaker 6: the administration is not dotting its size and crossing its

434
00:23:37,280 --> 00:23:38,240
Speaker 6: peace on legal question.

435
00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:42,280
Speaker 3: And after Friday seven to two decision where the Supreme

436
00:23:42,320 --> 00:23:46,760
Speaker 3: Court blocked the administration from using the Alien Enemies Act

437
00:23:46,800 --> 00:23:50,760
Speaker 3: to summarily deport alleged gang members being held in a

438
00:23:50,800 --> 00:23:54,879
Speaker 3: Texas facility. It seems like seven justices are going to

439
00:23:54,960 --> 00:23:59,280
Speaker 3: insist that the detainees have the chance to file habeas

440
00:23:59,280 --> 00:24:04,280
Speaker 3: corpus petitions. Thanks so much, Jonathan. That's Professor Jonathan Adler

441
00:24:04,320 --> 00:24:08,119
Speaker 3: of Case Western Reserve Law School. I'm June Grosso and

442
00:24:08,160 --> 00:24:10,080
Speaker 3: you're listening to Bloomberg.

443
00:24:17,240 --> 00:24:17,600
Speaker 2: Today.

444
00:24:17,680 --> 00:24:20,399
Speaker 3: I'm going to be sharing with you the best ever

445
00:24:20,560 --> 00:24:24,440
Speaker 3: vanilla cake recipe. It's nice and light and fluffy, it's

446
00:24:24,440 --> 00:24:28,400
Speaker 3: golden on the outside. It may be the best vanilla

447
00:24:28,480 --> 00:24:33,600
Speaker 3: cake recipe, but another baker says it's her recipe. Australian

448
00:24:33,720 --> 00:24:38,679
Speaker 3: influencer and baking guru Brooke Bellamy has millions of followers

449
00:24:38,720 --> 00:24:41,959
Speaker 3: on TikTok and her first cookbook was a best seller,

450
00:24:42,240 --> 00:24:46,720
Speaker 3: but her recipes for caramel slice and baklava went from

451
00:24:46,800 --> 00:24:52,399
Speaker 3: sweet to sour after another celebrity chef, Naji Mahashi, accused

452
00:24:52,400 --> 00:24:54,040
Speaker 3: Bellamy of copying those.

453
00:24:53,840 --> 00:24:56,880
Speaker 1: Recipes from her, and then yet another.

454
00:24:56,600 --> 00:25:01,080
Speaker 3: Celebrity chef accused her of copying the vanilla cake cake recipe.

455
00:25:01,280 --> 00:25:05,880
Speaker 3: Bellamy denied the accusations, saying she created the recipes over

456
00:25:06,000 --> 00:25:09,679
Speaker 3: many years, but the fallout. The media coverage and the

457
00:25:09,840 --> 00:25:13,960
Speaker 3: online trolling have been so intense that Bellamy went into

458
00:25:14,040 --> 00:25:17,800
Speaker 3: hiding and Mahasha even tried to turn down the vitriol

459
00:25:18,000 --> 00:25:19,359
Speaker 3: in an Instagram post.

460
00:25:20,119 --> 00:25:26,920
Speaker 9: Please stop the trolling now. I know I've made serious allegations,

461
00:25:27,640 --> 00:25:31,960
Speaker 9: but this does not justify the personal attacks that I've

462
00:25:32,000 --> 00:25:34,800
Speaker 9: seen online against Brook Bellamy.

463
00:25:35,520 --> 00:25:39,280
Speaker 3: My guest is intellectual property litigator Terrence Ross, a partner

464
00:25:39,400 --> 00:25:43,840
Speaker 3: Katin Yuchen Rosenman Terry. Let's start with the legal basics.

465
00:25:44,320 --> 00:25:46,359
Speaker 3: Can you copyright a recipe?

466
00:25:46,800 --> 00:25:50,480
Speaker 7: So June? In theory, it is possible to copyright cookbook

467
00:25:50,680 --> 00:25:54,480
Speaker 7: or even a few individual recipes. It's very hard to do.

468
00:25:54,840 --> 00:25:57,640
Speaker 7: It's considered one of the trickiest theories of the law,

469
00:25:57,960 --> 00:26:00,360
Speaker 7: and a little bit of protection you do get if

470
00:26:00,359 --> 00:26:03,880
Speaker 7: you're capable of getting a copyright is called thin protection

471
00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:06,560
Speaker 7: by copyright lawyers, which essentially means that you've got to

472
00:26:06,600 --> 00:26:08,920
Speaker 7: put the book on a xerox machine and copy it

473
00:26:09,000 --> 00:26:11,920
Speaker 7: word for word for there to be infringement. The problem

474
00:26:12,000 --> 00:26:15,200
Speaker 7: here is that copyright doesn't allow protection of ideas, and

475
00:26:15,720 --> 00:26:18,160
Speaker 7: a recipe how to bake a cake is simply an

476
00:26:18,240 --> 00:26:22,119
Speaker 7: idea and embedded in that idea, are some scientific principles

477
00:26:22,119 --> 00:26:24,840
Speaker 7: that are just required, and you're not allowed to copyright

478
00:26:24,880 --> 00:26:27,560
Speaker 7: scientific principles either. And it's got to be the certain

479
00:26:27,600 --> 00:26:29,600
Speaker 7: amount of the ingredients to get the right flavor, it's

480
00:26:29,640 --> 00:26:31,680
Speaker 7: got to be a certain temperature being baked in the oven,

481
00:26:31,760 --> 00:26:34,800
Speaker 7: and those aren't copyrightable. And so it is a very

482
00:26:34,920 --> 00:26:38,720
Speaker 7: challenging thing to assert copyright in a recipe or cookbook.

483
00:26:38,760 --> 00:26:41,960
Speaker 7: And about the only parts that can be copyrighted or

484
00:26:42,000 --> 00:26:44,760
Speaker 7: sort of the expression of the recipe so style the

485
00:26:44,840 --> 00:26:47,680
Speaker 7: wording describing what this cake is going to turn out

486
00:26:47,720 --> 00:26:50,240
Speaker 7: to be, what this cookie tastes like, as opposed to

487
00:26:50,240 --> 00:26:51,400
Speaker 7: the actual recipe.

488
00:26:51,600 --> 00:26:54,560
Speaker 3: So tell us about this recipe dispute, which has really

489
00:26:54,560 --> 00:26:58,000
Speaker 3: gotten a lot of play, not only in Australia but internationally.

490
00:26:58,280 --> 00:27:02,520
Speaker 7: So it's an interesting copyright dispute that came up in Australia.

491
00:27:02,560 --> 00:27:07,600
Speaker 7: There's a very famous ticktock baking influencer in Australia name

492
00:27:07,640 --> 00:27:12,359
Speaker 7: of brook Bellamy, and she has over three million followers

493
00:27:12,440 --> 00:27:15,960
Speaker 7: and is famous for posting TikTok videos of how you

494
00:27:16,200 --> 00:27:20,440
Speaker 7: bake you know, tasty treats. She actually runs a chain

495
00:27:20,680 --> 00:27:24,800
Speaker 7: of bakeries in Australia. And has achieved quite a bit

496
00:27:24,840 --> 00:27:29,560
Speaker 7: of notoriety down Under, but also expanding outside of Australia.

497
00:27:29,680 --> 00:27:32,080
Speaker 7: And so last October she came out with her first

498
00:27:32,160 --> 00:27:35,960
Speaker 7: cookbook and it was called Bake with Brookie, and that's

499
00:27:36,000 --> 00:27:39,320
Speaker 7: in partant names after her big good stores, which are

500
00:27:39,320 --> 00:27:42,520
Speaker 7: called Brookies bake Houses. But this book, because of her

501
00:27:42,680 --> 00:27:46,000
Speaker 7: fame as an influencer in the baking circles, was an

502
00:27:46,000 --> 00:27:49,720
Speaker 7: instant success. It sold over one hundred thousand copies in

503
00:27:49,880 --> 00:27:53,520
Speaker 7: less than six months, growth sales around four million dollars

504
00:27:53,680 --> 00:27:56,679
Speaker 7: and was the second best selling book for the Australian

505
00:27:56,720 --> 00:28:00,879
Speaker 7: Christmas season last year, so very very successful and just

506
00:28:00,920 --> 00:28:05,280
Speaker 7: a couple of days before the Australian Book Industry Awards,

507
00:28:05,320 --> 00:28:08,320
Speaker 7: which is a big deal in publishing circles in Australia,

508
00:28:08,400 --> 00:28:11,320
Speaker 7: and her book Baked with Brookie was in competition for

509
00:28:11,400 --> 00:28:15,520
Speaker 7: Best Cookbook with a couple other famous long time baking experts,

510
00:28:15,560 --> 00:28:19,320
Speaker 7: and one of them, Naji Mahashi, posted online that she

511
00:28:19,440 --> 00:28:22,560
Speaker 7: thought two of the recipes in Bake with Brookie were

512
00:28:22,960 --> 00:28:26,600
Speaker 7: plagiarized from her own cookbook and laid out the arguments

513
00:28:26,640 --> 00:28:30,320
Speaker 7: as to why, and this caused quite a stir and

514
00:28:30,920 --> 00:28:36,120
Speaker 7: then to make things worse, Sally McKenny, famous American baking

515
00:28:36,240 --> 00:28:38,400
Speaker 7: cook with a number of cookbooks of her own out

516
00:28:38,560 --> 00:28:40,680
Speaker 7: sort of piled on and said that she thought that

517
00:28:40,760 --> 00:28:43,960
Speaker 7: the vanilla cake recipe in Bake with Brookie had been

518
00:28:44,000 --> 00:28:46,240
Speaker 7: taken from one of her books. And when you compare

519
00:28:46,280 --> 00:28:49,840
Speaker 7: the recipes side by side, there is almost an identity

520
00:28:50,040 --> 00:28:53,960
Speaker 7: of ingredients and amounts and cooking temperatures. But in the

521
00:28:53,960 --> 00:28:57,520
Speaker 7: case of Sally mckenny's vanilla cake, she does something sort

522
00:28:57,520 --> 00:29:01,360
Speaker 7: of unusual. She uses buttermilk and Brooke Bellamy in Bake

523
00:29:01,440 --> 00:29:05,360
Speaker 7: with Brookie, her recipe for vanilla cake also used buttermilk,

524
00:29:05,440 --> 00:29:08,520
Speaker 7: which struck selling Kenny's odd so she brought this out

525
00:29:08,560 --> 00:29:10,720
Speaker 7: and it was sort of that point. The oven midst

526
00:29:10,760 --> 00:29:14,800
Speaker 7: were off, Folks were chiming in and trolling Brooke Bellamy

527
00:29:14,840 --> 00:29:17,160
Speaker 7: onlines to the point where she had to shut down

528
00:29:17,200 --> 00:29:21,280
Speaker 7: her ig account. The press was pamped outside her house

529
00:29:21,360 --> 00:29:23,720
Speaker 7: so she couldn't leave the house. She did not attend

530
00:29:23,760 --> 00:29:26,640
Speaker 7: the awards ceremony for the book Industry. Now. The only

531
00:29:26,680 --> 00:29:28,960
Speaker 7: time she's left her house since this happened last week

532
00:29:28,960 --> 00:29:31,400
Speaker 7: of April was to go visit her lawyers, and she

533
00:29:31,560 --> 00:29:32,840
Speaker 7: was followed the entire way.

534
00:29:33,320 --> 00:29:36,400
Speaker 3: Did Nagi Mahashi file a lawsuit against her.

535
00:29:36,800 --> 00:29:41,560
Speaker 7: So there is not actually a copyright infringement lawsuit filed yet.

536
00:29:41,840 --> 00:29:45,600
Speaker 7: Naji Mahashi has taken it to her lawyers, who have

537
00:29:45,760 --> 00:29:48,320
Speaker 7: reached out to the lawyers for the publishing house to

538
00:29:48,320 --> 00:29:51,240
Speaker 7: publish Bake with Brookie the Penguin Random House Group, and

539
00:29:51,360 --> 00:29:55,440
Speaker 7: the two sides have exchanged letters apparently making accusations and

540
00:29:55,480 --> 00:29:58,480
Speaker 7: denying accusations, and Brooke Bellamy one of the few postings

541
00:29:58,520 --> 00:30:01,280
Speaker 7: she's done is a complete deny aisle in an explanation

542
00:30:01,400 --> 00:30:05,080
Speaker 7: that much of the recipe business, both in baked goods

543
00:30:05,320 --> 00:30:08,480
Speaker 7: and dinners, lunches and things, all that is derivative to

544
00:30:08,520 --> 00:30:11,320
Speaker 7: start with, and you build on the same foundation, and

545
00:30:11,480 --> 00:30:15,160
Speaker 7: therefore she does not believe that she did anything just

546
00:30:15,360 --> 00:30:17,600
Speaker 7: reputable dishonest alone unlawful.

547
00:30:17,920 --> 00:30:21,280
Speaker 3: But if the recipe can't be copyrighted, what are the

548
00:30:21,320 --> 00:30:24,760
Speaker 3: allegations or causes of action you could even bring.

549
00:30:25,200 --> 00:30:28,120
Speaker 7: So it's not that recipes can't be copyrighted. In theory,

550
00:30:28,160 --> 00:30:30,920
Speaker 7: they can be copyrighted, it's just very hard to do that.

551
00:30:31,040 --> 00:30:33,560
Speaker 7: And to the extent that you have copyright protection, it

552
00:30:33,640 --> 00:30:36,800
Speaker 7: almost has to be an exact duplicate of the recipe

553
00:30:36,840 --> 00:30:41,000
Speaker 7: to constitute copyright infringement. A lot of what's going on

554
00:30:41,200 --> 00:30:45,800
Speaker 7: here is moral posturing. There is this background noise that

555
00:30:45,920 --> 00:30:50,080
Speaker 7: is being created that somehow Brooke Bellamy is not being honest,

556
00:30:50,440 --> 00:30:53,280
Speaker 7: is stealing other people's works. Won't say being a fraud,

557
00:30:53,360 --> 00:30:56,240
Speaker 7: but you know that's the implication that people want to draw.

558
00:30:56,480 --> 00:30:58,800
Speaker 7: In a very competitive industry in which people are fighting

559
00:30:58,800 --> 00:31:01,560
Speaker 7: for book sales and the June this is not something

560
00:31:01,560 --> 00:31:03,880
Speaker 7: that's new. The problem is that the law is so

561
00:31:04,080 --> 00:31:07,200
Speaker 7: weak in the area it almost invites plagiarism, if not

562
00:31:07,280 --> 00:31:12,400
Speaker 7: copyright infringement. If you take the very first US American cookbook,

563
00:31:12,720 --> 00:31:16,720
Speaker 7: very famous book called American Cookery by Amelia Simmons, who

564
00:31:16,880 --> 00:31:20,719
Speaker 7: was apparently a domestic servant in a household in Connecticut

565
00:31:20,880 --> 00:31:24,400
Speaker 7: in the early Republic, and she published this herself, she

566
00:31:24,480 --> 00:31:27,080
Speaker 7: paid for it in seventeen ninety six, and it was

567
00:31:27,200 --> 00:31:31,480
Speaker 7: unique because it used exclusively American ingredients, it used American

568
00:31:31,560 --> 00:31:34,960
Speaker 7: cooking language, and put forward a lot of very famous

569
00:31:35,000 --> 00:31:38,160
Speaker 7: but duil that time, sub rosa American recipes. So this

570
00:31:38,440 --> 00:31:41,240
Speaker 7: was the first cookbook to have pumpkin pie in it.

571
00:31:41,240 --> 00:31:44,960
Speaker 7: It was the first cookbook to suggest cranberried sauce with turkey.

572
00:31:45,200 --> 00:31:47,560
Speaker 7: It was the first cookbook to use the word cookie,

573
00:31:47,840 --> 00:31:51,040
Speaker 7: and it sold more copies than any other book in

574
00:31:51,200 --> 00:31:54,479
Speaker 7: the Early Republic other than the Bible. The problem was,

575
00:31:54,760 --> 00:31:57,400
Speaker 7: as Miss Simmons said in her second edition, so she

576
00:31:57,520 --> 00:31:59,760
Speaker 7: wasn't making any money off of it. People were freely

577
00:32:00,160 --> 00:32:02,760
Speaker 7: being it and distributing it very widely. The main reason

578
00:32:02,800 --> 00:32:05,080
Speaker 7: she came out with secondition was to correct errors that

579
00:32:05,120 --> 00:32:08,040
Speaker 7: the publisher had made that were pretty big errors regarding

580
00:32:08,120 --> 00:32:10,080
Speaker 7: types of ingredients to be used in the mounts and

581
00:32:10,120 --> 00:32:12,200
Speaker 7: temperatures to be cooked bad. But I mean, historians have

582
00:32:12,200 --> 00:32:14,840
Speaker 7: called this book the second tech Question of Independence because

583
00:32:14,840 --> 00:32:16,880
Speaker 7: he said to Americans, we no longer had to follow

584
00:32:16,880 --> 00:32:20,120
Speaker 7: British cooking traditions, baking traditions. We have everything we need

585
00:32:20,160 --> 00:32:22,800
Speaker 7: here to be Americans, even in our domestic household, and

586
00:32:22,920 --> 00:32:25,720
Speaker 7: was very influential with women. And yet there was massive

587
00:32:25,760 --> 00:32:28,479
Speaker 7: plagiarism for fifty years, to the extent where people were

588
00:32:28,520 --> 00:32:30,600
Speaker 7: starting to substitute out her name, so she wasn't even

589
00:32:30,600 --> 00:32:32,880
Speaker 7: getting credit. He flashed forward in time and he come

590
00:32:32,920 --> 00:32:34,800
Speaker 7: to nineteen eighty four, and you have this famous case

591
00:32:34,840 --> 00:32:37,959
Speaker 7: between Richard Only and Richard Nelson. Richard Only had written

592
00:32:38,000 --> 00:32:41,520
Speaker 7: a number of French recipe books in English, very influential

593
00:32:41,520 --> 00:32:44,520
Speaker 7: in bringing French cooking to America. And Richard Nelson came

594
00:32:44,520 --> 00:32:47,000
Speaker 7: out with a new book on American French recipes I

595
00:32:47,000 --> 00:32:49,360
Speaker 7: think it was called, and Richard Only said, wait, a Mesican,

596
00:32:49,560 --> 00:32:51,920
Speaker 7: I count thirty nine recipes that you took out of

597
00:32:51,960 --> 00:32:55,000
Speaker 7: my book. And he actually filed a lawsuit, and the

598
00:32:55,080 --> 00:32:58,840
Speaker 7: defendant agreed to the entry of an order stipulating that

599
00:32:58,840 --> 00:33:01,680
Speaker 7: there had been infringement, So it wasn't aggressively litigated. He

600
00:33:01,760 --> 00:33:04,240
Speaker 7: just wanted to get rid of the lawsuit and entered

601
00:33:04,280 --> 00:33:08,360
Speaker 7: into a stipulated order. But there're a case where copyright

602
00:33:08,400 --> 00:33:11,080
Speaker 7: lawsuit was actually thought of. It flashed forward in time

603
00:33:11,120 --> 00:33:13,360
Speaker 7: to twenty twenty one in the UK and the publishing

604
00:33:13,400 --> 00:33:18,320
Speaker 7: house Bloomsbury with drew what was a really enthusiastically expect

605
00:33:18,320 --> 00:33:22,320
Speaker 7: that new book on Singaporean recipes by Elizabeth Hey and

606
00:33:22,680 --> 00:33:26,400
Speaker 7: another Singaporean chef, Sharon. We had a last year that

607
00:33:26,440 --> 00:33:29,200
Speaker 7: most of the recipes were taken from an older book

608
00:33:29,240 --> 00:33:31,800
Speaker 7: by her, and the publishing house withdrew the work they'd

609
00:33:31,840 --> 00:33:34,760
Speaker 7: already printed some seventeen thousand copies and were ready to

610
00:33:34,760 --> 00:33:38,040
Speaker 7: go to market, and just the mere suggestion that there

611
00:33:38,040 --> 00:33:41,200
Speaker 7: had been copyright infringement caused them to withdraw the work

612
00:33:41,240 --> 00:33:43,640
Speaker 7: and not publish it. In effect. So we have this

613
00:33:43,760 --> 00:33:49,000
Speaker 7: long history of disputes over recipes and cookbooks despite this

614
00:33:49,200 --> 00:33:52,520
Speaker 7: whole legalarity being sort of a gray area as to

615
00:33:52,560 --> 00:33:56,280
Speaker 7: whether or not there is protection, there's not protection, what's protected?

616
00:33:56,480 --> 00:33:58,440
Speaker 7: How much do you have to take to get protection?

617
00:33:58,680 --> 00:34:00,360
Speaker 7: How much do you need to take the order to

618
00:34:00,400 --> 00:34:02,600
Speaker 7: be able to bring an infringement lawsuit? But they keep

619
00:34:02,640 --> 00:34:04,800
Speaker 7: coming up, you know, every decade or so, and now

620
00:34:04,920 --> 00:34:07,680
Speaker 7: this dispute would refell me. It's just another example of

621
00:34:07,720 --> 00:34:11,040
Speaker 7: that down under this time. But the substantive law of

622
00:34:11,200 --> 00:34:15,319
Speaker 7: copyright is the same under Australian US UK law when

623
00:34:15,320 --> 00:34:17,799
Speaker 7: it comes to cookbooks and recipes, and so it's just

624
00:34:17,880 --> 00:34:20,160
Speaker 7: interesting to see this flare up from time to time

625
00:34:20,200 --> 00:34:21,400
Speaker 7: across the different continents.

626
00:34:21,440 --> 00:34:23,719
Speaker 3: So if Naji Mahashi came to you and said I

627
00:34:23,800 --> 00:34:25,640
Speaker 3: want to sue take my case.

628
00:34:25,719 --> 00:34:26,399
Speaker 1: What would you do?

629
00:34:26,880 --> 00:34:27,000
Speaker 2: You know?

630
00:34:27,120 --> 00:34:30,680
Speaker 7: I think I would say that your chances of getting

631
00:34:30,920 --> 00:34:36,120
Speaker 7: ultimately a verdict for damages in a copyright infringement lawsuit

632
00:34:36,239 --> 00:34:40,280
Speaker 7: would not be good. However, Australia does have one feature,

633
00:34:40,640 --> 00:34:42,640
Speaker 7: and it's a copyright law that the United States law

634
00:34:42,640 --> 00:34:44,960
Speaker 7: does not have. It's this notion of moral rights. When

635
00:34:45,000 --> 00:34:47,920
Speaker 7: you use somebody else's work in this way, you have

636
00:34:48,000 --> 00:34:51,600
Speaker 7: to give them credit or you've committed a separate, unlawful action,

637
00:34:51,920 --> 00:34:56,359
Speaker 7: which is at least remediable by an injunction requiring that

638
00:34:56,400 --> 00:34:59,279
Speaker 7: credit be given where credit is due. And so there

639
00:34:59,320 --> 00:35:01,120
Speaker 7: is that option, But my advice would be to go

640
00:35:01,160 --> 00:35:04,399
Speaker 7: about it exactly the way Naja Mahashi's listeners are going

641
00:35:04,400 --> 00:35:06,880
Speaker 7: about it. You bring up the issue with the publishing

642
00:35:06,880 --> 00:35:09,040
Speaker 7: house and you say, look, we think there's a problem here,

643
00:35:09,080 --> 00:35:12,400
Speaker 7: and see what they say, and then if they deny it,

644
00:35:12,440 --> 00:35:14,759
Speaker 7: you have a basis to take that to the court

645
00:35:14,760 --> 00:35:17,600
Speaker 7: of public opinion. Is being done here and see what happened.

646
00:35:17,600 --> 00:35:20,120
Speaker 7: Because after a lot of what's going on here has

647
00:35:20,160 --> 00:35:23,520
Speaker 7: to do with competition within the cookbook field, and there's

648
00:35:23,560 --> 00:35:27,560
Speaker 7: this general perception that you should not be plagarizing other

649
00:35:27,600 --> 00:35:30,319
Speaker 7: people's recipes. But if you choose to do so, you

650
00:35:30,360 --> 00:35:33,279
Speaker 7: ask permission and give credit. And I cannot tell you,

651
00:35:33,360 --> 00:35:37,080
Speaker 7: June how many potential copyright cases I've been able to

652
00:35:37,560 --> 00:35:40,960
Speaker 7: avoid on behalf of my clients simply by telling them, look,

653
00:35:41,160 --> 00:35:44,759
Speaker 7: say you're sorry, and give full credit, because at the

654
00:35:44,880 --> 00:35:47,720
Speaker 7: end of the day, that's often what it's all about.

655
00:35:48,120 --> 00:35:51,800
Speaker 7: They just want to be recognized as this was their creation,

656
00:35:52,000 --> 00:35:54,799
Speaker 7: this was their work, and especially in this field of

657
00:35:54,840 --> 00:35:59,120
Speaker 7: cookbooks recipes, permissions are often granted to allow someone to

658
00:35:59,239 --> 00:36:01,719
Speaker 7: use another person and recipe. You just have to ask

659
00:36:01,760 --> 00:36:03,560
Speaker 7: and then give credit. And I think that's the big

660
00:36:03,680 --> 00:36:06,839
Speaker 7: lesson to be learned here with respect to copyright law

661
00:36:06,920 --> 00:36:09,600
Speaker 7: in the context of potbooks and recipes, because.

662
00:36:09,400 --> 00:36:11,879
Speaker 1: It seems like the damage has already been done here.

663
00:36:11,960 --> 00:36:13,440
Speaker 1: I mean, she's hiding in her house.

664
00:36:13,920 --> 00:36:18,480
Speaker 7: I think this is probably an enormous financial hit. Certainly

665
00:36:18,520 --> 00:36:23,000
Speaker 7: it's bound to affect sales of her book Bake with Brookie.

666
00:36:23,360 --> 00:36:26,560
Speaker 7: She's taken down her social media and when you have

667
00:36:27,320 --> 00:36:32,000
Speaker 7: a large portion of your persona wrapped up as an

668
00:36:32,040 --> 00:36:35,239
Speaker 7: online influencer in the social media forms, to have that

669
00:36:35,280 --> 00:36:38,840
Speaker 7: simply disappear, it's not just personally hurtful to you, it's

670
00:36:38,880 --> 00:36:40,000
Speaker 7: financially damaging.

671
00:36:40,280 --> 00:36:44,200
Speaker 3: And the repercussions for Bellamy seem to be continuing. Thanks

672
00:36:44,200 --> 00:36:47,920
Speaker 3: so much, Terry. That's Terrence Ross of Catain Euchen Rosenman,