1
00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosseo from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:09,119 --> 00:00:13,080
Speaker 2: As federal prosecutors are pushing forward with a broad drug

3
00:00:13,160 --> 00:00:19,240
Speaker 2: trafficking and narco terrorism conspiracy case against ousted Venezuelan leader

4
00:00:19,600 --> 00:00:24,320
Speaker 2: Nicolas Maduro. President Trump discussed the case during a cabinet

5
00:00:24,360 --> 00:00:25,480
Speaker 2: meeting on Thursday.

6
00:00:26,120 --> 00:00:29,160
Speaker 3: Was a major purveyor of drugs coming into our country.

7
00:00:30,000 --> 00:00:35,880
Speaker 3: And he's now been captured, and you know, I guess

8
00:00:35,960 --> 00:00:39,360
Speaker 3: be given a fair trial, but I would imagine there

9
00:00:39,400 --> 00:00:42,520
Speaker 3: are other trials coming because they have just they've really

10
00:00:43,240 --> 00:00:45,920
Speaker 3: suit him, just an affraction of the kind of things

11
00:00:45,960 --> 00:00:48,280
Speaker 3: that he's done. Other cases are going to be brought.

12
00:00:48,320 --> 00:00:52,920
Speaker 2: As you probably know, Maduro is already facing stiff prison

13
00:00:53,080 --> 00:00:57,520
Speaker 2: time if convicted. The narco terrorism carries a twenty year

14
00:00:57,760 --> 00:01:02,480
Speaker 2: mandatory minimum sentence. My guest is a Lumdar Hamdani, a

15
00:01:02,560 --> 00:01:05,840
Speaker 2: partner at Bracewell and the former US Attorney for the

16
00:01:05,880 --> 00:01:10,960
Speaker 2: Southern District of Texas. The narco terrorism statute is rarely used.

17
00:01:11,319 --> 00:01:12,120
Speaker 2: Tell us about it.

18
00:01:12,560 --> 00:01:16,920
Speaker 1: The narco terrorism Statute requires the government to prove that

19
00:01:16,959 --> 00:01:21,480
Speaker 1: the defendants conspired to engage in conduct, first of all,

20
00:01:21,560 --> 00:01:26,039
Speaker 1: punishable under normal narco statute. It's called section eight forty

21
00:01:26,040 --> 00:01:29,520
Speaker 1: one A, and that is the distribution of, for example,

22
00:01:29,959 --> 00:01:33,319
Speaker 1: over five kilograms of a certain substance like cocaine, and

23
00:01:33,400 --> 00:01:37,320
Speaker 1: knowing and intending to provide directly and indirectly. And this

24
00:01:37,360 --> 00:01:41,440
Speaker 1: is what makes Naco terrorism different. Something of pecuniary value

25
00:01:41,959 --> 00:01:46,640
Speaker 1: to a group that's engaged in terrorist activity. So you know,

26
00:01:46,959 --> 00:01:50,960
Speaker 1: normally it's been used, for example, to go after groups that,

27
00:01:51,000 --> 00:01:55,160
Speaker 1: for example, have supported the FARC, which is a Colombian

28
00:01:55,600 --> 00:02:00,640
Speaker 1: designated terrorist organization. And you know, it's it's really used.

29
00:02:00,760 --> 00:02:03,280
Speaker 1: Is the statute that's not used that much. When I

30
00:02:03,440 --> 00:02:06,080
Speaker 1: was the US Attorney for the Southern District of Texas,

31
00:02:06,120 --> 00:02:08,400
Speaker 1: we had four hundred miles of border with Mexico. I

32
00:02:08,440 --> 00:02:12,800
Speaker 1: had probably the largest team of cartel prosecutors, and that

33
00:02:12,919 --> 00:02:16,960
Speaker 1: statute is rarely used, probably because of a couple of reasons.

34
00:02:16,960 --> 00:02:21,080
Speaker 1: You've got two additional layers of complexity that deal with

35
00:02:21,200 --> 00:02:24,280
Speaker 1: the Knocko terrorism statute. First of all, you've got to prove,

36
00:02:24,320 --> 00:02:28,839
Speaker 1: of course, as a drug conspiracy, and the larger the organization,

37
00:02:29,160 --> 00:02:33,519
Speaker 1: the higher up the organization, proving that becomes incredibly complex.

38
00:02:33,760 --> 00:02:39,200
Speaker 1: And add to that the additional complexity of charging somebody

39
00:02:39,680 --> 00:02:43,840
Speaker 1: with providing some sort of pecuniary interest to a terrorist

40
00:02:43,840 --> 00:02:46,880
Speaker 1: group or group engaged in terrorist activity. And I spent

41
00:02:46,960 --> 00:02:50,840
Speaker 1: most of my career in national security chasing terrorists, and

42
00:02:50,880 --> 00:02:53,000
Speaker 1: I can tell you just the run of the mill

43
00:02:53,320 --> 00:02:57,320
Speaker 1: material support to terrorism statutes themselves are complicated. So it

44
00:02:57,400 --> 00:03:02,120
Speaker 1: is a statue that is complex, has a lot of

45
00:03:02,760 --> 00:03:06,840
Speaker 1: complexities in being able to prove, but is also incredibly powerful.

46
00:03:07,040 --> 00:03:10,440
Speaker 2: Is there a reason why you think the administration chows

47
00:03:10,560 --> 00:03:12,560
Speaker 2: narco terrorism charges here?

48
00:03:13,080 --> 00:03:14,919
Speaker 1: You know, I think it is, and I think it's

49
00:03:14,960 --> 00:03:18,240
Speaker 1: just to make sure that they have several different options

50
00:03:18,639 --> 00:03:22,760
Speaker 1: as it relates to somebody's high profile of course, as

51
00:03:23,040 --> 00:03:26,520
Speaker 1: Maduro and his wife and his son, right, and several

52
00:03:26,600 --> 00:03:30,240
Speaker 1: higher people within the government, you know, as a prosecutor,

53
00:03:30,520 --> 00:03:32,799
Speaker 1: one of the things we're going to do is try

54
00:03:32,840 --> 00:03:36,240
Speaker 1: to bring, of course charges that follow the facts and

55
00:03:36,320 --> 00:03:38,720
Speaker 1: the law, but I'm going to give myself many options

56
00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:41,720
Speaker 1: when charging, especially somebody's high profile. Is this So what

57
00:03:41,760 --> 00:03:45,600
Speaker 1: you've got is you've got the traditional drug conspiracy statutes,

58
00:03:45,920 --> 00:03:49,040
Speaker 1: which on its face should be you know, relatively simple

59
00:03:49,080 --> 00:03:51,800
Speaker 1: to prove, although like I said, complex to hire you

60
00:03:51,840 --> 00:03:54,840
Speaker 1: go up a chain. You've also got a couple of

61
00:03:55,000 --> 00:03:58,440
Speaker 1: weapons statutes. One of them is pretty powerful. It's one

62
00:03:58,520 --> 00:04:00,840
Speaker 1: that is a thirty year minimum one that relates to

63
00:04:00,880 --> 00:04:03,680
Speaker 1: machine guns. And the reason I believe they added on,

64
00:04:03,760 --> 00:04:06,800
Speaker 1: of course, the narco terrorism statute was for two reasons.

65
00:04:06,880 --> 00:04:09,960
Speaker 1: First of all, give themselves a second option when dealing

66
00:04:09,960 --> 00:04:13,320
Speaker 1: with somebody like a Maduro. But also it's part of

67
00:04:13,360 --> 00:04:16,320
Speaker 1: the narrative. It's part of the narrative of the indictment. Now,

68
00:04:16,360 --> 00:04:19,840
Speaker 1: this indictment is what you call a speaking indictment, So

69
00:04:19,880 --> 00:04:21,920
Speaker 1: it's one where the prosecutors have said, let me tell

70
00:04:21,960 --> 00:04:24,640
Speaker 1: you a story. And the reason they do that is,

71
00:04:24,720 --> 00:04:28,000
Speaker 1: of course, first of all, to tell the public what's

72
00:04:28,080 --> 00:04:32,320
Speaker 1: going on. Secondly, to deter others from doing what happened here,

73
00:04:32,440 --> 00:04:36,040
Speaker 1: but most importantly, to let Maduro and his co defendants

74
00:04:36,080 --> 00:04:38,479
Speaker 1: know this is what we have, right and this is

75
00:04:38,520 --> 00:04:39,279
Speaker 1: what you're facing.

76
00:04:39,640 --> 00:04:41,640
Speaker 2: So what do they have? What do you know that

77
00:04:41,640 --> 00:04:43,000
Speaker 2: they have from the indictment.

78
00:04:43,839 --> 00:04:46,240
Speaker 1: So from the indictment, there's many different things that you

79
00:04:46,279 --> 00:04:49,680
Speaker 1: see here. First of all, you see a decades long

80
00:04:49,720 --> 00:04:53,440
Speaker 1: conspiracy as it relates, let's say, first of all, to drugs.

81
00:04:54,080 --> 00:04:59,960
Speaker 1: You've seen tons of drugs being exported out of Venezuela

82
00:05:00,200 --> 00:05:03,159
Speaker 1: through Colombia to other parts of the world, including the

83
00:05:03,279 --> 00:05:08,240
Speaker 1: United States. You've got people high within the Venezuelan government

84
00:05:08,320 --> 00:05:12,040
Speaker 1: involved in this, including and this is important in prior

85
00:05:12,040 --> 00:05:15,159
Speaker 1: in Diamonds. They had two other defendants that were charged

86
00:05:15,200 --> 00:05:18,480
Speaker 1: and they pled guilty, one in June of twenty twenty

87
00:05:18,520 --> 00:05:21,640
Speaker 1: five and one in two and twenty three. And so

88
00:05:21,839 --> 00:05:25,080
Speaker 1: what that tells you is the government itself has a

89
00:05:25,160 --> 00:05:28,719
Speaker 1: case built upon not only, of course documentary evidence, but

90
00:05:28,800 --> 00:05:31,960
Speaker 1: also some very high level cooperatives. And then what makes

91
00:05:32,000 --> 00:05:36,560
Speaker 1: this endement very interesting is how they lay out the

92
00:05:36,680 --> 00:05:41,159
Speaker 1: rise of Maduro over those decades and how he used

93
00:05:41,240 --> 00:05:46,080
Speaker 1: his power his office to not only of course enrich himself,

94
00:05:46,720 --> 00:05:51,560
Speaker 1: enrich his family, but also enrich several cartels that have

95
00:05:51,640 --> 00:05:54,640
Speaker 1: not been designated as foreign terrorist organizations. One of them,

96
00:05:54,680 --> 00:05:56,719
Speaker 1: of course we talked about earlier, was the FARC. The

97
00:05:56,760 --> 00:05:59,279
Speaker 1: other one you've got trend de Agua, which is of

98
00:05:59,279 --> 00:06:03,280
Speaker 1: course based in Venezuela. You've also got the Zettas out

99
00:06:03,320 --> 00:06:06,440
Speaker 1: of Mexico, which it also names. And so you know,

100
00:06:06,640 --> 00:06:11,400
Speaker 1: what you have with this indictment is a story about

101
00:06:11,440 --> 00:06:15,320
Speaker 1: a man who rose up over the decades, used his

102
00:06:15,560 --> 00:06:19,919
Speaker 1: growing power and influence to enrich himself, who cared not

103
00:06:20,160 --> 00:06:23,320
Speaker 1: about the drugs that were leaving his country and in

104
00:06:23,400 --> 00:06:27,400
Speaker 1: fact invited that to also enrich himself. You saw a family,

105
00:06:27,680 --> 00:06:31,640
Speaker 1: at least according to the indictment, that was equally as corrupt.

106
00:06:31,960 --> 00:06:34,839
Speaker 1: And then finally, what I found interesting in this indictment

107
00:06:35,480 --> 00:06:37,920
Speaker 1: is beyond all the other things I've just talked about, right,

108
00:06:38,400 --> 00:06:43,960
Speaker 1: is that the government questions the legitimacy of Maduro as

109
00:06:43,960 --> 00:06:47,360
Speaker 1: a leader. And they talk about the twenty twenty four election,

110
00:06:48,000 --> 00:06:51,440
Speaker 1: which he lost, but he claims he won and he

111
00:06:51,440 --> 00:06:55,200
Speaker 1: Hence what they do is say because he's an illegitimate leader.

112
00:06:55,480 --> 00:06:59,080
Speaker 1: I think the implication is later on, if his defense says, well,

113
00:06:59,080 --> 00:07:03,400
Speaker 1: we have immunity, we have diplomatic community because he is

114
00:07:03,400 --> 00:07:06,080
Speaker 1: the leader of a state, the government's response is going

115
00:07:06,120 --> 00:07:09,360
Speaker 1: to be, no, he isn't. He is the illegitimate leader.

116
00:07:09,640 --> 00:07:11,920
Speaker 1: He calls himself one, but he is not one.

117
00:07:12,760 --> 00:07:16,800
Speaker 2: There was an executive order that declared drug cartels as

118
00:07:16,920 --> 00:07:21,679
Speaker 2: foreign terrorist organizations? Does that cut with two wide a swap?

119
00:07:22,320 --> 00:07:26,400
Speaker 1: On February twentieth, Secretary of State then declared not all cartels,

120
00:07:26,400 --> 00:07:32,360
Speaker 1: but eight cortels in Mexico as foreign terrorist organizations, including

121
00:07:32,400 --> 00:07:36,840
Speaker 1: for example, Cartel del Noroeste, the Sinaloa Cartel, the Hellisco

122
00:07:36,920 --> 00:07:42,320
Speaker 1: New Generation Cantel also known as CJNG, and the Gulf Cartel.

123
00:07:42,360 --> 00:07:44,480
Speaker 1: Those are the four big cartels in Mexico, and if

124
00:07:44,480 --> 00:07:47,360
Speaker 1: you were to Mexico, they run swaps of Mexico. In

125
00:07:47,360 --> 00:07:50,920
Speaker 1: addition to that, the Secretary of State also designated Frenda

126
00:07:51,040 --> 00:07:54,520
Speaker 1: Agua out of Venezuela as one of the cortels as

127
00:07:54,720 --> 00:07:58,200
Speaker 1: foreign terrorist organizations. And I'll tell you this the one

128
00:07:58,240 --> 00:08:01,600
Speaker 1: thing about cartels that I learned, especially as the US Attorney.

129
00:08:01,760 --> 00:08:03,000
Speaker 1: I remember I used to get up in front of

130
00:08:03,000 --> 00:08:06,760
Speaker 1: cameras when I was announcing charges against cartel members. I mean,

131
00:08:06,800 --> 00:08:08,840
Speaker 1: it was a very important thing to do, and I

132
00:08:08,880 --> 00:08:12,320
Speaker 1: would say, I would say, my goal is to disrupt

133
00:08:12,680 --> 00:08:17,240
Speaker 1: and dismantle the cartels. But I also understood that once

134
00:08:17,280 --> 00:08:19,960
Speaker 1: we cut off the head of a cartel, another one

135
00:08:20,400 --> 00:08:25,800
Speaker 1: would grow. Whatever you think about this administration, it's designation

136
00:08:26,000 --> 00:08:30,120
Speaker 1: of cartels, which I would argue or organizations only held

137
00:08:30,160 --> 00:08:32,400
Speaker 1: built on one thing, and that is to get as

138
00:08:32,480 --> 00:08:35,439
Speaker 1: much money as they can at the expense of anything,

139
00:08:35,480 --> 00:08:38,800
Speaker 1: at the expense of lives of public officials, of police

140
00:08:39,240 --> 00:08:42,000
Speaker 1: of innocent people. They will do it just to get

141
00:08:42,040 --> 00:08:43,600
Speaker 1: an extra dollar.

142
00:08:43,760 --> 00:08:44,000
Speaker 4: You know.

143
00:08:44,120 --> 00:08:48,080
Speaker 1: And so I would argue that designating as foreign terist

144
00:08:48,120 --> 00:08:54,080
Speaker 1: organizations may may help up the one source of lifelines

145
00:08:54,120 --> 00:08:56,720
Speaker 1: that they have, the blood that runs through their veins,

146
00:08:56,720 --> 00:08:59,960
Speaker 1: and that is money. And so if organizations, if companies,

147
00:09:00,080 --> 00:09:04,680
Speaker 1: for example, say I cannot hire this company in Mexico

148
00:09:04,760 --> 00:09:08,520
Speaker 1: because this company I'm hiring is related to the cartels,

149
00:09:08,559 --> 00:09:12,000
Speaker 1: and I could be charged. My organizations could be charged

150
00:09:12,200 --> 00:09:15,520
Speaker 1: for providing material support to terrorism. And you know, I'll

151
00:09:15,559 --> 00:09:20,000
Speaker 1: give you a great example. In twenty twenty one, a

152
00:09:20,040 --> 00:09:25,160
Speaker 1: company called LeFarge out of France was the very first

153
00:09:25,200 --> 00:09:28,240
Speaker 1: and the only company so far that has pled guilty

154
00:09:28,240 --> 00:09:31,240
Speaker 1: to providing material support to terrorism. What it did is

155
00:09:31,240 --> 00:09:35,160
Speaker 1: it went to Syria a decade earlier and tried to

156
00:09:35,200 --> 00:09:37,720
Speaker 1: work with Syria, and within there they had this hire

157
00:09:37,760 --> 00:09:41,160
Speaker 1: isis as their security. Anyway, in the one year they

158
00:09:41,160 --> 00:09:44,760
Speaker 1: worked in Syria, they made seventy million dollars in revenue.

159
00:09:45,200 --> 00:09:48,360
Speaker 1: When they pled guilty, they paid a seven hundred and

160
00:09:48,440 --> 00:09:53,480
Speaker 1: seventy eight million dollar fine. It was a company defining charge.

161
00:09:53,920 --> 00:09:56,880
Speaker 1: And so a long way to say this, companies that

162
00:09:56,920 --> 00:10:02,960
Speaker 1: provide assistance to cartels. Unnotice that they could be facing

163
00:10:03,280 --> 00:10:06,960
Speaker 1: the charges of providing material support to terrorism. So the

164
00:10:07,120 --> 00:10:11,320
Speaker 1: argument I think is this is another incredibly powerful way

165
00:10:12,040 --> 00:10:14,960
Speaker 1: to maybe finally disrupt and dismantled cortels.

166
00:10:15,840 --> 00:10:20,120
Speaker 2: In the initial twenty twenty indictment of Maduro, there was

167
00:10:20,160 --> 00:10:22,679
Speaker 2: a claim that he was the leader of the Cartel

168
00:10:22,760 --> 00:10:26,760
Speaker 2: de la Solos, but that allegation is missing from the

169
00:10:26,760 --> 00:10:27,679
Speaker 2: current indictment.

170
00:10:29,080 --> 00:10:32,280
Speaker 1: So in the current indictment they talk about the Cartel

171
00:10:32,320 --> 00:10:35,000
Speaker 1: de la Solos the Cartels of the Sun, which is

172
00:10:35,000 --> 00:10:40,240
Speaker 1: an organization in Venezuela that really involved the higher military

173
00:10:40,280 --> 00:10:43,000
Speaker 1: part of Venezuela. But you're right when it comes to

174
00:10:43,360 --> 00:10:49,320
Speaker 1: the drug trafficking activity and tying it to a terrorist

175
00:10:49,360 --> 00:10:54,160
Speaker 1: group or terrorist activity, they really focus on trender Agua,

176
00:10:54,320 --> 00:10:57,800
Speaker 1: the FARC, which is that Columbian terrorist organization, and a

177
00:10:57,880 --> 00:11:02,720
Speaker 1: couple of Mexican cartels. They mentioned the Cartel de la Solos,

178
00:11:02,720 --> 00:11:06,000
Speaker 1: but they don't mention it in that Vein Interestingly, though,

179
00:11:06,400 --> 00:11:09,280
Speaker 1: June in November of last year, which I found to

180
00:11:09,280 --> 00:11:12,559
Speaker 1: be interesting, the Secretary of State declared the Cartel del

181
00:11:12,720 --> 00:11:16,599
Speaker 1: Solos a foreign terrist organization, And so you know, I

182
00:11:16,600 --> 00:11:19,360
Speaker 1: don't know if that was done in anticipation of this

183
00:11:19,480 --> 00:11:22,800
Speaker 1: indictment coming down in January, but that is an interesting

184
00:11:22,960 --> 00:11:25,080
Speaker 1: thing that the Secretary of State has done. I think

185
00:11:25,120 --> 00:11:29,480
Speaker 1: it's another indication for companies and for those doing business

186
00:11:29,520 --> 00:11:32,880
Speaker 1: in Venezuela stay away, of course from the Mexican cartels

187
00:11:32,920 --> 00:11:35,520
Speaker 1: and trend Agua, but also stay away from Cartel de

188
00:11:35,600 --> 00:11:36,120
Speaker 1: la Solos.

189
00:11:36,440 --> 00:11:39,800
Speaker 2: Stay with me coming up next, Why the judge refused

190
00:11:39,840 --> 00:11:43,839
Speaker 2: to dismiss the case against Maduro. I'm June Grosso and

191
00:11:43,880 --> 00:11:49,000
Speaker 2: this is Bloomberg. Ousted Venezuela and leader Nicolas Maduro and

192
00:11:49,040 --> 00:11:53,480
Speaker 2: his wife appeared in a Manhattan federal court Thursday, as

193
00:11:53,520 --> 00:11:57,160
Speaker 2: the US is pushing forward with a broad drug trafficking

194
00:11:57,520 --> 00:12:03,520
Speaker 2: and narco terrorism conspiracy case against him. Prosecutors claimed that Maduro,

195
00:12:03,640 --> 00:12:07,120
Speaker 2: who was seized by the US military on January third,

196
00:12:07,600 --> 00:12:11,040
Speaker 2: played a key role in a conspiracy to traffic cocaine

197
00:12:11,040 --> 00:12:14,720
Speaker 2: in the US. They also allege that he and others

198
00:12:14,840 --> 00:12:19,880
Speaker 2: partnered with groups designated by the US as foreign terrorist organizations,

199
00:12:20,360 --> 00:12:23,400
Speaker 2: and that he sought to enrich himself while serving in

200
00:12:23,480 --> 00:12:26,840
Speaker 2: government more than a quarter of a century. An early

201
00:12:26,920 --> 00:12:30,560
Speaker 2: flashpoint in the case is that Maduro claims the US

202
00:12:30,720 --> 00:12:33,880
Speaker 2: is preventing him from receiving money from the government in

203
00:12:33,920 --> 00:12:37,880
Speaker 2: Caracas to pay his legal defense. I've been talking to

204
00:12:37,920 --> 00:12:41,960
Speaker 2: a former US attorney, Alumdar Hamdani, tell us what the

205
00:12:42,000 --> 00:12:45,360
Speaker 2: prosecution would have to prove to get a jury to

206
00:12:45,440 --> 00:12:49,240
Speaker 2: return a conviction on the narco terrorism charge.

207
00:12:49,880 --> 00:12:55,000
Speaker 1: You know, if I'm preparing my case against Maduro in

208
00:12:55,080 --> 00:12:56,880
Speaker 1: this endement, I'm gonna be looking at a couple of things.

209
00:12:56,880 --> 00:12:58,880
Speaker 1: First of all, like I said, I've got to prove

210
00:12:59,240 --> 00:13:03,199
Speaker 1: that only does Maduro and the other five co defendants

211
00:13:03,280 --> 00:13:07,199
Speaker 1: part of a large drug conspiracy, but I've also got

212
00:13:07,240 --> 00:13:13,080
Speaker 1: to prove that that drug conspiracy financially benefited terrorists and

213
00:13:13,160 --> 00:13:17,920
Speaker 1: terrorist activity. And so as a prosecutor, I am looking

214
00:13:17,960 --> 00:13:19,599
Speaker 1: at several things. First of all, I'm going to be

215
00:13:19,679 --> 00:13:22,320
Speaker 1: looking at witnesses. Those are going to be the biggest

216
00:13:22,320 --> 00:13:24,640
Speaker 1: part of my case, because how do I get into

217
00:13:24,640 --> 00:13:27,320
Speaker 1: the head of a Maduro. How do I get into

218
00:13:27,360 --> 00:13:30,600
Speaker 1: the head of Maduro's wife and his son and others

219
00:13:30,679 --> 00:13:33,240
Speaker 1: high up in the government. The best way I can

220
00:13:33,280 --> 00:13:38,280
Speaker 1: do that is through the testimony of cooperators. That, of course,

221
00:13:38,480 --> 00:13:41,760
Speaker 1: also brings itself a whole host of risks. And in

222
00:13:41,760 --> 00:13:45,400
Speaker 1: this case, I talked about two former co defendants pleading guilty,

223
00:13:45,800 --> 00:13:49,280
Speaker 1: which is good for the government but also adds a

224
00:13:49,360 --> 00:13:51,880
Speaker 1: layer of risk for the government. If I'm the defense,

225
00:13:51,920 --> 00:13:53,960
Speaker 1: what I'm going to be doing is really concentrating on

226
00:13:54,000 --> 00:13:57,600
Speaker 1: those two former co defendants and the deals they got,

227
00:13:57,800 --> 00:14:00,200
Speaker 1: and then really harping on the fact that you know,

228
00:14:00,240 --> 00:14:02,000
Speaker 1: they were also part of the drug activity, and so

229
00:14:02,080 --> 00:14:04,680
Speaker 1: why should we believe them in what they're saying. They're

230
00:14:04,720 --> 00:14:08,280
Speaker 1: just trying to save themselves. In addition to that, because

231
00:14:08,440 --> 00:14:12,280
Speaker 1: this is, you know, a foreign jurisdiction, my guess is,

232
00:14:12,320 --> 00:14:13,880
Speaker 1: and I do not know this, but my guess is,

233
00:14:13,880 --> 00:14:17,000
Speaker 1: there are, of course foreign wire taps. They're going to

234
00:14:17,040 --> 00:14:20,680
Speaker 1: have to be that only looked at, but also protected

235
00:14:20,680 --> 00:14:23,920
Speaker 1: if need be. My guess is the Central Intelligence Agency

236
00:14:23,960 --> 00:14:26,560
Speaker 1: is probably very active and has been active in that area.

237
00:14:26,600 --> 00:14:29,200
Speaker 1: So there's going to be sources that I may use

238
00:14:29,280 --> 00:14:32,000
Speaker 1: if the CIO will let me, and if not, I

239
00:14:32,040 --> 00:14:34,480
Speaker 1: have to figure out how to protect. And those are

240
00:14:34,480 --> 00:14:38,960
Speaker 1: the added complexities of dealing with especially national security issues.

241
00:14:39,000 --> 00:14:41,720
Speaker 1: You know, if I'm a prosecutor, what I'm looking at

242
00:14:41,800 --> 00:14:43,800
Speaker 1: is two things. First of all, how do I make

243
00:14:43,840 --> 00:14:47,160
Speaker 1: my drug case I got that. Secondly, how do I

244
00:14:47,240 --> 00:14:50,760
Speaker 1: tie him to terrorist activity? Okay, I got that, And

245
00:14:50,960 --> 00:14:53,360
Speaker 1: there's another account that talks about machine guns. I think

246
00:14:53,360 --> 00:14:56,040
Speaker 1: I'm pretty good by proving that he had machine guns.

247
00:14:56,320 --> 00:14:58,520
Speaker 1: But the other part that gives me heartburn when I

248
00:14:58,520 --> 00:15:01,960
Speaker 1: stay up at night is what else is all out there?

249
00:15:02,480 --> 00:15:05,680
Speaker 1: For example, you know, is there information in the CIA's

250
00:15:05,720 --> 00:15:08,240
Speaker 1: files that I've not seen? Is there information in the

251
00:15:08,320 --> 00:15:11,040
Speaker 1: NSA's files I've not seen? Is there information that a

252
00:15:11,160 --> 00:15:14,480
Speaker 1: foreign government provided to us that I've not seen as

253
00:15:14,480 --> 00:15:17,320
Speaker 1: a prosecutor, And how is that going to affect my case?

254
00:15:17,360 --> 00:15:20,640
Speaker 1: And if it, for example, helps the defense, that I

255
00:15:20,680 --> 00:15:24,480
Speaker 1: have a constitucial obligation to provide that to the defense,

256
00:15:24,520 --> 00:15:27,600
Speaker 1: And how do I provide that and still protect sources

257
00:15:27,640 --> 00:15:29,640
Speaker 1: and methods And those are all the different things I'm

258
00:15:29,680 --> 00:15:32,680
Speaker 1: thinking of as a prosecutor as I walking through this case.

259
00:15:32,840 --> 00:15:35,720
Speaker 2: There have been very few convictions in the twenty year

260
00:15:35,880 --> 00:15:40,120
Speaker 2: history of the Narco Terrorism Statute. So do you think

261
00:15:40,160 --> 00:15:42,800
Speaker 2: this is an uphill battle for prosecutors.

262
00:15:43,560 --> 00:15:43,800
Speaker 4: Yeah?

263
00:15:43,880 --> 00:15:47,480
Speaker 1: I think generally in a case like this, it is

264
00:15:47,560 --> 00:15:51,960
Speaker 1: always going to be a sophisticated, complex case, which makes

265
00:15:52,000 --> 00:15:55,520
Speaker 1: it difficult. Right if I'm a prosecutor, but you know,

266
00:15:55,800 --> 00:15:58,960
Speaker 1: on all the terrorism cases I prosecuted, I can tell

267
00:15:59,000 --> 00:16:02,120
Speaker 1: you going I knew they were difficult, even though the

268
00:16:02,120 --> 00:16:06,680
Speaker 1: facts may be simple, because I'm dealing with issues, you know,

269
00:16:06,880 --> 00:16:10,160
Speaker 1: like terrorists, I'm dealing with classified issues. There's complexities that

270
00:16:10,200 --> 00:16:12,480
Speaker 1: are already built in. So that's the kind of case

271
00:16:12,680 --> 00:16:15,600
Speaker 1: the prosecutors will have now in their endeement, they were

272
00:16:15,680 --> 00:16:20,520
Speaker 1: careful to name several different terrorist groups, foreign terrorist organizations

273
00:16:20,520 --> 00:16:23,320
Speaker 1: in fact. And one thing that's I think company if

274
00:16:23,320 --> 00:16:26,040
Speaker 1: I'm a prosecutor in this statute is I do not

275
00:16:26,240 --> 00:16:31,200
Speaker 1: have to prove that Maduro financially benefited or financially helped

276
00:16:31,600 --> 00:16:34,760
Speaker 1: a foreign terrorist organization like the ones we talked about earlier,

277
00:16:35,320 --> 00:16:40,400
Speaker 1: but just that his dealings in cocaine, for example, financially

278
00:16:40,440 --> 00:16:44,080
Speaker 1: benefited terrorist activity. Now, the reason I mentioned foreign terrorist

279
00:16:44,200 --> 00:16:47,720
Speaker 1: organizations because to a jury, that's a simple leap to make.

280
00:16:47,960 --> 00:16:50,720
Speaker 1: If I'm talking about trend de Aguar and it is

281
00:16:50,760 --> 00:16:53,920
Speaker 1: already designated as a foreign terrorist organization, then it's a

282
00:16:53,960 --> 00:16:57,320
Speaker 1: small leap to make for me to say and because

283
00:16:57,600 --> 00:17:02,920
Speaker 1: that cocaine activity benefited that organization than it benefited terrorist activity,

284
00:17:02,960 --> 00:17:05,480
Speaker 1: and the easiest one, of course, is the Fark because

285
00:17:05,520 --> 00:17:09,480
Speaker 1: of its proximity to Venezuela, the next door neighbor in Colombia.

286
00:17:09,680 --> 00:17:12,280
Speaker 1: So as a prosecutor, this is going to be a

287
00:17:12,359 --> 00:17:14,919
Speaker 1: long trial. It's going to be one where the defense

288
00:17:15,000 --> 00:17:17,919
Speaker 1: is really going to attack the credibility of the witnesses

289
00:17:17,960 --> 00:17:21,520
Speaker 1: I've put up to corroborate the evidence I have. But

290
00:17:21,600 --> 00:17:23,879
Speaker 1: it's one that I'm going to be ready for. And

291
00:17:23,920 --> 00:17:26,800
Speaker 1: in this case, unlike many districts, the Southern dishrit of

292
00:17:26,840 --> 00:17:31,160
Speaker 1: New York has an embarrassment of riches and really good prosecutors.

293
00:17:31,440 --> 00:17:34,720
Speaker 1: But also because unlike the Southern District of Texas, where

294
00:17:35,320 --> 00:17:39,239
Speaker 1: that district had more indictments than any other district in

295
00:17:39,240 --> 00:17:41,480
Speaker 1: the country. And why is that Because there's so many

296
00:17:41,480 --> 00:17:44,480
Speaker 1: immigration crimes and low level drug crimes that come across

297
00:17:44,520 --> 00:17:47,400
Speaker 1: that border. So because of that, the prosecutors I had

298
00:17:47,600 --> 00:17:50,480
Speaker 1: were usually either one or two on a case. It's

299
00:17:50,520 --> 00:17:52,240
Speaker 1: tough to put more than two people in a case,

300
00:17:52,280 --> 00:17:55,280
Speaker 1: even a complex case. In the Southern District of New York.

301
00:17:55,280 --> 00:17:58,200
Speaker 1: There are four assistant US attorneys on this case. That

302
00:17:58,280 --> 00:18:01,320
Speaker 1: tells you something, that tells you that this office has

303
00:18:01,359 --> 00:18:04,959
Speaker 1: dedicated four of its best prosecutors onto this case, and

304
00:18:05,000 --> 00:18:08,760
Speaker 1: so you know, again it's one that's not insturmentable. It's

305
00:18:08,760 --> 00:18:10,760
Speaker 1: one that's going to be always tough, and it's one

306
00:18:10,840 --> 00:18:13,000
Speaker 1: to if I'm the defense counsel, that I'm always going

307
00:18:13,040 --> 00:18:13,760
Speaker 1: to be worried about.

308
00:18:14,440 --> 00:18:18,480
Speaker 2: Maduro was expected to mount several defenses before trial, one

309
00:18:18,520 --> 00:18:22,800
Speaker 2: being that he's immune as a head of state, another

310
00:18:22,840 --> 00:18:26,960
Speaker 2: that he was kidnapped and taken into custody illegally in

311
00:18:27,080 --> 00:18:30,960
Speaker 2: violation of international law. Do you think any of those

312
00:18:31,080 --> 00:18:34,840
Speaker 2: will be successful? I don't think they've fared well in

313
00:18:34,920 --> 00:18:35,800
Speaker 2: other cases.

314
00:18:36,440 --> 00:18:38,840
Speaker 1: I don't think legally. I don't think the judge is

315
00:18:38,840 --> 00:18:41,040
Speaker 1: going to dismiss the case because of the head of

316
00:18:41,040 --> 00:18:43,360
Speaker 1: state immuney issue for the reasons I stated, for example,

317
00:18:43,400 --> 00:18:46,680
Speaker 1: because of how they've drafted as indeminded and how they've

318
00:18:46,760 --> 00:18:50,960
Speaker 1: characterized Maduro, and on the issue you know, of how

319
00:18:51,000 --> 00:18:54,359
Speaker 1: he was captured. It's always been a longstanding principle that

320
00:18:54,480 --> 00:18:57,359
Speaker 1: how somebody gets to the courtroom is ruly of no

321
00:18:57,600 --> 00:19:01,199
Speaker 1: consequence when it comes to the ability of the charges,

322
00:19:01,240 --> 00:19:03,440
Speaker 1: and that's going to be the case here, I believe

323
00:19:03,480 --> 00:19:08,520
Speaker 1: as well. Now prosecutors aren't immune from something called jury nullification.

324
00:19:09,000 --> 00:19:10,800
Speaker 1: I mean that is the idea that you know, no

325
00:19:10,840 --> 00:19:14,359
Speaker 1: matter what the evidence is put on at trial, because

326
00:19:14,560 --> 00:19:18,679
Speaker 1: of a reason such as there's an overriding sympathy or

327
00:19:18,680 --> 00:19:22,160
Speaker 1: an overriding you know, maybe an injustice that the jury feels,

328
00:19:22,400 --> 00:19:25,359
Speaker 1: they will still rule against the United States. And so

329
00:19:25,440 --> 00:19:29,040
Speaker 1: jury nullification is always a concern for prosecuted and so

330
00:19:29,200 --> 00:19:31,240
Speaker 1: the defense will probably bring up and try to bring

331
00:19:31,320 --> 00:19:33,240
Speaker 1: up I mean, the prosecutes will try to stop to

332
00:19:33,280 --> 00:19:35,800
Speaker 1: some happening, but they will bring up, Hey, my guy

333
00:19:35,960 --> 00:19:40,040
Speaker 1: was taken out of Venezuela, kidnapped by you know, by

334
00:19:40,080 --> 00:19:43,439
Speaker 1: the military, and taken to a court in Manhattan. He

335
00:19:43,640 --> 00:19:46,240
Speaker 1: was the leader of his nation and thrown into a

336
00:19:46,280 --> 00:19:50,000
Speaker 1: prison in Manhattan, and they will try to use that

337
00:19:50,040 --> 00:19:53,840
Speaker 1: to of course make a jury nullification argument. But I

338
00:19:53,880 --> 00:19:57,040
Speaker 1: think legally the case will survive those two issues.

339
00:19:57,280 --> 00:20:01,040
Speaker 2: Wayne Maduro and his wife appeared in court on Thursday.

340
00:20:01,520 --> 00:20:05,800
Speaker 2: There was an argument about why the US government was

341
00:20:05,880 --> 00:20:10,919
Speaker 2: preventing him from getting money from the Venezuelan government to

342
00:20:11,000 --> 00:20:13,720
Speaker 2: pay for his legal defense, and the judge said he

343
00:20:13,800 --> 00:20:17,560
Speaker 2: wasn't going to dismiss the case, but he questioned why

344
00:20:17,600 --> 00:20:22,879
Speaker 2: federal prosecutors weren't allowing the Venezuelan government to give him

345
00:20:22,880 --> 00:20:24,080
Speaker 2: money for the legal fees.

346
00:20:24,880 --> 00:20:27,080
Speaker 1: So, you know, let's go back and fundamentally look at

347
00:20:27,160 --> 00:20:30,800
Speaker 1: who Maduro is and his wife. Who they are. They

348
00:20:30,800 --> 00:20:35,280
Speaker 1: are criminal defendants in a US court of law, brought

349
00:20:35,280 --> 00:20:38,560
Speaker 1: in under a US indictment. So they have, like everybody,

350
00:20:38,640 --> 00:20:41,760
Speaker 1: six amn rights, and that six Amendment right. The most

351
00:20:41,760 --> 00:20:43,800
Speaker 1: basic one of those basic rights is you have the

352
00:20:43,920 --> 00:20:47,040
Speaker 1: right to your choice of counsel. So the argument being

353
00:20:47,080 --> 00:20:49,800
Speaker 1: made by the defense in this particular case is, hey, look,

354
00:20:50,600 --> 00:20:53,959
Speaker 1: Maduro and his wife want to hire us as their council.

355
00:20:54,280 --> 00:20:57,720
Speaker 1: They have chosen us to be their counsel. The problem

356
00:20:57,800 --> 00:21:01,040
Speaker 1: is the funds that it would take to pay you know,

357
00:21:01,160 --> 00:21:04,680
Speaker 1: would be paid for by Venezuela and Venezuela. I'm assuming

358
00:21:04,880 --> 00:21:08,560
Speaker 1: the government of Venezuela is willing to fund the defense

359
00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:12,000
Speaker 1: of Maduro and his wife, despite how they're maybe being

360
00:21:12,040 --> 00:21:14,359
Speaker 1: friendly to the United States right now. That said, the

361
00:21:14,359 --> 00:21:17,919
Speaker 1: government of Venezuela is willing to pay those defense costs

362
00:21:18,119 --> 00:21:20,359
Speaker 1: the government of the United States. That the prosecutor has

363
00:21:20,359 --> 00:21:23,080
Speaker 1: come back and said, wait a second, Wait a second,

364
00:21:23,240 --> 00:21:28,680
Speaker 1: Venezuela is a sanctioned country and you need an OPAC

365
00:21:28,800 --> 00:21:32,800
Speaker 1: license an officer Foreign Asset Control license issued by the

366
00:21:32,800 --> 00:21:35,879
Speaker 1: Department of Treasury to do anything to get anything paid

367
00:21:35,920 --> 00:21:39,480
Speaker 1: for by Venezuela to deal with Venezuela. What was interesting

368
00:21:39,560 --> 00:21:41,400
Speaker 1: in this case, a few days after he was arrested,

369
00:21:41,760 --> 00:21:45,439
Speaker 1: O Fact actually granted a license for the defense to

370
00:21:45,520 --> 00:21:49,359
Speaker 1: go ahead and use funds from Venezuela for Venezuela to

371
00:21:49,359 --> 00:21:51,919
Speaker 1: pay for his defense. Then a few days later, Oh

372
00:21:52,040 --> 00:21:55,000
Speaker 1: Fact reverse course, and the government's now arguing, oh, that

373
00:21:55,040 --> 00:21:58,159
Speaker 1: was an era that wasn't supposed to happen, and so

374
00:21:58,240 --> 00:22:01,119
Speaker 1: that the basic argument by the defense is because we

375
00:22:01,240 --> 00:22:03,960
Speaker 1: can't have access to those funds we as lawyers, and

376
00:22:04,040 --> 00:22:07,119
Speaker 1: because Madua can't have access to those funds, Madua can't

377
00:22:07,240 --> 00:22:10,600
Speaker 1: use and can't choose the council of his choice. The

378
00:22:10,680 --> 00:22:13,600
Speaker 1: government's response is, these are sanctioned funds. This is a

379
00:22:13,640 --> 00:22:16,520
Speaker 1: slush fund created by you. Madua. You don't get access

380
00:22:16,800 --> 00:22:20,119
Speaker 1: to your own slush fund. And secondly, Maduro, you have

381
00:22:20,240 --> 00:22:24,040
Speaker 1: access to the Federal Defender's office if you want, you

382
00:22:24,080 --> 00:22:27,280
Speaker 1: get access to free counsel. And then the argument by

383
00:22:27,320 --> 00:22:30,280
Speaker 1: the defense is you're going to overwhelm that Federal Defender's

384
00:22:30,280 --> 00:22:33,040
Speaker 1: office with this one case, and you know, they should

385
00:22:33,040 --> 00:22:35,280
Speaker 1: have the counsel of their choice. So it's a very

386
00:22:35,320 --> 00:22:38,040
Speaker 1: interesting argument. They've asked actually the court to dismiss the

387
00:22:38,080 --> 00:22:41,480
Speaker 1: case because of that. The Court's not willing to dismiss

388
00:22:41,560 --> 00:22:45,080
Speaker 1: the case, I don't think because of that, but they've

389
00:22:45,080 --> 00:22:47,520
Speaker 1: got to find some sort of solution. Like you said,

390
00:22:47,800 --> 00:22:53,000
Speaker 1: they expressed a concern about, you know, if Maduro's out already,

391
00:22:53,080 --> 00:22:57,280
Speaker 1: what's the national security concern for the o fact license?

392
00:22:57,320 --> 00:23:00,840
Speaker 1: And if Venezuela is cooperating with the United States, you know,

393
00:23:00,880 --> 00:23:04,280
Speaker 1: with from all extraction, you know, having his vice president

394
00:23:04,320 --> 00:23:07,480
Speaker 1: take over, then you know, what is the national security

395
00:23:07,480 --> 00:23:09,359
Speaker 1: concern in general? So those are the arguments that are

396
00:23:09,359 --> 00:23:13,160
Speaker 1: coming out. Interesting, fascinating case. You know, as I thought

397
00:23:13,200 --> 00:23:15,159
Speaker 1: through this case, and one of the things as I

398
00:23:15,200 --> 00:23:18,159
Speaker 1: think through the future is you know, how will not

399
00:23:18,200 --> 00:23:22,280
Speaker 1: only this administration of course, use the Naucuo Terrorism Statute,

400
00:23:22,359 --> 00:23:25,920
Speaker 1: but how would other administrations use the Naco Terrorism Statute

401
00:23:26,040 --> 00:23:30,080
Speaker 1: to dislodge dictators, to dislodge what they consider to be

402
00:23:30,119 --> 00:23:33,040
Speaker 1: a legitimate leader. So one of the things about this

403
00:23:33,320 --> 00:23:37,280
Speaker 1: case that's interesting is I think dictators and despots of

404
00:23:37,320 --> 00:23:41,480
Speaker 1: the future be unnotice that the United States may come

405
00:23:41,520 --> 00:23:45,960
Speaker 1: after you, not with a war, but maybe with an indictment,

406
00:23:46,400 --> 00:23:48,560
Speaker 1: you know, brought out by the Southern dishitt of New York.

407
00:23:48,720 --> 00:23:51,040
Speaker 2: Thanks so much for joining me on the show. That's

408
00:23:51,119 --> 00:23:55,280
Speaker 2: former US attorney Alum dar haam Dani, a partner at Bracewell,

409
00:23:55,680 --> 00:23:58,920
Speaker 2: coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show. The courts

410
00:23:58,960 --> 00:24:04,040
Speaker 2: are asking for more money for security measures to defend

411
00:24:04,119 --> 00:24:08,720
Speaker 2: federal judges from increasing threats. I'm June Grosso and you're

412
00:24:08,800 --> 00:24:13,760
Speaker 2: listening to Bloomberg. Court officials are asking Congress for more

413
00:24:13,800 --> 00:24:18,400
Speaker 2: money next year for security measures as the federal judiciary

414
00:24:18,480 --> 00:24:23,760
Speaker 2: combats heightened threats to judges. Officials say these security efforts

415
00:24:23,800 --> 00:24:29,080
Speaker 2: are quote more urgent than ever before because security incidents

416
00:24:29,080 --> 00:24:34,320
Speaker 2: of significant concern for judges increased by fifty seven percent

417
00:24:34,800 --> 00:24:38,520
Speaker 2: last year and are on pace to rise again. Joining

418
00:24:38,520 --> 00:24:42,760
Speaker 2: me is Bloomberg Law reporter Suzanne Monnac. Susanne tell us

419
00:24:42,800 --> 00:24:46,199
Speaker 2: what the court officials are asking for and why.

420
00:24:46,920 --> 00:24:49,320
Speaker 5: Every year around this time of year, we will see,

421
00:24:49,320 --> 00:24:51,080
Speaker 5: you know, federal agencies and in this case, we're seeing

422
00:24:51,080 --> 00:24:53,760
Speaker 5: the federal judiciary put in their request for what would

423
00:24:53,800 --> 00:24:55,919
Speaker 5: be like there for post wish list of funding that

424
00:24:55,960 --> 00:24:58,840
Speaker 5: they'd like to receive for next fiscal year, which starts

425
00:24:58,840 --> 00:25:00,879
Speaker 5: October first. It feels a a little crazy given that

426
00:25:00,920 --> 00:25:03,480
Speaker 5: we haven't even fully funded the government for this fiscal year.

427
00:25:03,520 --> 00:25:05,720
Speaker 5: Of course, we are still in a partial shutdown, but

428
00:25:05,760 --> 00:25:08,120
Speaker 5: we are already looking ahead, and for the judiciary, court

429
00:25:08,160 --> 00:25:11,359
Speaker 5: security is one of its top priorities, because, of course

430
00:25:11,359 --> 00:25:13,679
Speaker 5: you mentioned we're seeing sort of a rising and heightened

431
00:25:13,720 --> 00:25:16,760
Speaker 5: threat environment for judges. It's something we're really hearing sitting

432
00:25:16,840 --> 00:25:19,160
Speaker 5: judges talk more and more about. And judges don't speak

433
00:25:19,200 --> 00:25:22,080
Speaker 5: publicly that often, but the judiciary has said that, you know,

434
00:25:22,160 --> 00:25:24,720
Speaker 5: threats to the court and judicial independence are on the

435
00:25:24,760 --> 00:25:27,359
Speaker 5: list of things that they can speak publicly about, and

436
00:25:27,400 --> 00:25:29,400
Speaker 5: we are starting to see judges kind of increasingly avail

437
00:25:29,440 --> 00:25:31,680
Speaker 5: themselves at that and talk about threats that they're receiving

438
00:25:32,080 --> 00:25:35,320
Speaker 5: unsolicited pizza deliveries to their door as a signal that

439
00:25:35,320 --> 00:25:37,800
Speaker 5: the sender knows where the judge lives, to their personal residents.

440
00:25:38,119 --> 00:25:40,640
Speaker 5: Sometimes those pizzas have been in the name of Daniel Anderol,

441
00:25:40,680 --> 00:25:42,520
Speaker 5: who is the son of a New Jersey federal judge

442
00:25:42,520 --> 00:25:45,320
Speaker 5: who was killed almost six years ago by a disferential

443
00:25:45,359 --> 00:25:48,199
Speaker 5: attorney posing as a delivery man, and so you know,

444
00:25:48,240 --> 00:25:50,320
Speaker 5: we were seeing this increase in threats to judges. A

445
00:25:50,320 --> 00:25:52,520
Speaker 5: lot of it's driven by social media, and so the

446
00:25:52,640 --> 00:25:56,040
Speaker 5: Judiciary accordingly has requested a small increase about three percent

447
00:25:56,400 --> 00:25:59,080
Speaker 5: over current levels, almost a billion dollars nine hundred and

448
00:25:59,119 --> 00:26:02,720
Speaker 5: twenty million for courthouse security measures next fiscal year. That's

449
00:26:02,720 --> 00:26:05,120
Speaker 5: going to go towards things like the court security officers

450
00:26:05,119 --> 00:26:07,240
Speaker 5: that you see when you enter a courthouse, by the

451
00:26:07,280 --> 00:26:10,640
Speaker 5: metal detectors or who monitor the courtrooms, and as well

452
00:26:10,640 --> 00:26:14,400
Speaker 5: as fixing broken equipment or outdated equipment in courthouses themselves,

453
00:26:14,480 --> 00:26:18,160
Speaker 5: like Badgin are security cameras, those types of equipment.

454
00:26:18,560 --> 00:26:23,320
Speaker 2: Interesting, there's a pilot program to actually have the Marshal

455
00:26:23,560 --> 00:26:28,560
Speaker 2: Service protect federal courthouse grounds instead of the Department of

456
00:26:28,600 --> 00:26:33,040
Speaker 2: Homeland Security, and it's the Marshal Service that provides security

457
00:26:33,080 --> 00:26:34,760
Speaker 2: for judges, so it makes.

458
00:26:34,520 --> 00:26:36,320
Speaker 4: Sense, that's right.

459
00:26:36,400 --> 00:26:40,159
Speaker 5: It's somewhat of a consolidation in these different security measures

460
00:26:40,200 --> 00:26:43,000
Speaker 5: for judges, which is weirdly in a way, maybe somewhat

461
00:26:43,000 --> 00:26:45,480
Speaker 5: oddly for those who haven't followed this issue, split across

462
00:26:45,560 --> 00:26:49,119
Speaker 5: multiple departments. So we're seeing the judiciary obviously handle some

463
00:26:49,160 --> 00:26:52,680
Speaker 5: court security issues when it comes to replacing infrastructure in courthouses.

464
00:26:53,040 --> 00:26:55,680
Speaker 5: They have Court security officers, but they sort of share

465
00:26:55,680 --> 00:26:57,679
Speaker 5: a funding with the US Martial Service, which is part

466
00:26:57,680 --> 00:27:00,240
Speaker 5: of the Justice Department, that really takes a lead. Their

467
00:27:00,240 --> 00:27:03,159
Speaker 5: primary mission is the protection of the federal judiciary. But

468
00:27:03,200 --> 00:27:05,000
Speaker 5: then we have this third body involved, which is the

469
00:27:05,000 --> 00:27:08,720
Speaker 5: Department of Homeland Security's Federal Protective Service, and they handle

470
00:27:08,760 --> 00:27:11,719
Speaker 5: like the perimeter around the courthouse. And I you know,

471
00:27:11,800 --> 00:27:15,040
Speaker 5: from speaking with former marshals and people who have used

472
00:27:15,040 --> 00:27:17,960
Speaker 5: to be involved in court security, you know there's always

473
00:27:18,000 --> 00:27:20,679
Speaker 5: going to be communication breakdowns, are issues when you have

474
00:27:20,760 --> 00:27:21,200
Speaker 5: that many.

475
00:27:21,080 --> 00:27:21,840
Speaker 4: Cooks in the kitchen.

476
00:27:22,240 --> 00:27:24,400
Speaker 5: And so I think the Judiciary is considering this idea,

477
00:27:24,440 --> 00:27:27,359
Speaker 5: and they've this pilot program is you know, predates this

478
00:27:27,480 --> 00:27:29,720
Speaker 5: budget request. They're saying that they would like to continue

479
00:27:29,760 --> 00:27:33,040
Speaker 5: it where the marshals will be taking over for FPS

480
00:27:33,040 --> 00:27:35,520
Speaker 5: in that specific area, just to kind of create more

481
00:27:35,560 --> 00:27:36,480
Speaker 5: and more continuity.

482
00:27:36,960 --> 00:27:41,600
Speaker 2: There were multiple cyber attacks explain what they're trying to

483
00:27:41,600 --> 00:27:42,119
Speaker 2: do there.

484
00:27:42,600 --> 00:27:47,240
Speaker 5: Absolutely, the Judiciary faced a cyber attack last year that

485
00:27:47,720 --> 00:27:52,080
Speaker 5: had involved the case management system and you know, it

486
00:27:52,320 --> 00:27:56,520
Speaker 5: potentially sealed records that shouldn't have been accessed and Obviously,

487
00:27:56,600 --> 00:27:59,639
Speaker 5: cyber has been a priority for you know, across the

488
00:27:59,680 --> 00:28:02,600
Speaker 5: federal government and shoring up cybersystems, and so that's an

489
00:28:02,640 --> 00:28:05,640
Speaker 5: area where we see the Judiciary trying to boost their

490
00:28:05,680 --> 00:28:08,679
Speaker 5: resources toward as well. They're asking for money for a

491
00:28:08,720 --> 00:28:12,000
Speaker 5: new case management system ten million dollars. The Judiciary's current

492
00:28:12,040 --> 00:28:14,399
Speaker 5: case management system, if you've ever seen it online, is

493
00:28:14,440 --> 00:28:17,960
Speaker 5: not particularly modern. They're also looking for more money nearly

494
00:28:18,000 --> 00:28:22,439
Speaker 5: fifty million dollars for an ongoing cybersecurity and IT modernization

495
00:28:22,560 --> 00:28:24,400
Speaker 5: plan to just kind of continue.

496
00:28:24,000 --> 00:28:25,680
Speaker 4: That work to combat cyber attacks.

497
00:28:25,680 --> 00:28:28,160
Speaker 5: So we are seeing the judiciary make that a security

498
00:28:28,400 --> 00:28:29,280
Speaker 5: priority as well.

499
00:28:29,480 --> 00:28:33,520
Speaker 2: This may seem odd to people, but it's the judiciary

500
00:28:33,600 --> 00:28:38,040
Speaker 2: that funds the Federal Public Defender's Office, so they want

501
00:28:38,120 --> 00:28:40,080
Speaker 2: more money there too as well.

502
00:28:40,240 --> 00:28:40,640
Speaker 4: That's right.

503
00:28:40,680 --> 00:28:43,840
Speaker 5: The federal defenders have really been cast strapped lately. And yes,

504
00:28:43,840 --> 00:28:45,600
Speaker 5: as you mentioned, it's one of those situations where the

505
00:28:45,640 --> 00:28:48,440
Speaker 5: judiciary funds the public defenders, but of course the prosecutors

506
00:28:48,480 --> 00:28:50,640
Speaker 5: on the other side of the courtroom are funded by

507
00:28:50,680 --> 00:28:53,440
Speaker 5: the Justice Department and are typically better funded than the

508
00:28:53,480 --> 00:28:56,680
Speaker 5: federal defenders. The federal defenders really faced a crunch last

509
00:28:56,760 --> 00:28:59,040
Speaker 5: year after the judiciary ran out of money for what's

510
00:28:59,080 --> 00:29:01,440
Speaker 5: done is the Criminal Justice Act Panel, and those are

511
00:29:01,480 --> 00:29:04,640
Speaker 5: private attorneys who agreed to take on certain cases that

512
00:29:04,680 --> 00:29:07,840
Speaker 5: the public defenders might be doing where the defenders cannot.

513
00:29:07,840 --> 00:29:09,480
Speaker 4: So that might be, for example, a case.

514
00:29:09,280 --> 00:29:12,120
Speaker 5: With multiple defendants, so the public defenders can take one

515
00:29:12,120 --> 00:29:13,680
Speaker 5: of them, but they'd have a conflict of interest in

516
00:29:13,720 --> 00:29:15,320
Speaker 5: representing the rest of the group. So that would be

517
00:29:15,360 --> 00:29:17,680
Speaker 5: a good example where we'd see the CGA panel come in.

518
00:29:18,120 --> 00:29:21,680
Speaker 5: Those attorneys are often small firms, even solo practitioners, and

519
00:29:21,720 --> 00:29:26,200
Speaker 5: they were left for months pronting their own expenses for witnesses, transcripts, everything,

520
00:29:26,360 --> 00:29:29,640
Speaker 5: not to mention their own hourly fees. So we saw

521
00:29:29,680 --> 00:29:32,720
Speaker 5: them in quite a bad situation financially last year. That

522
00:29:32,800 --> 00:29:35,440
Speaker 5: raised a lot of alarm within the judiciary. Thankfully, they

523
00:29:35,520 --> 00:29:38,440
Speaker 5: were repaid back in the fall, but there is concern

524
00:29:38,600 --> 00:29:40,400
Speaker 5: that this could happen again if they run out of

525
00:29:40,400 --> 00:29:43,239
Speaker 5: funds again and Congress isn't able to give them new

526
00:29:43,240 --> 00:29:45,680
Speaker 5: ones in time, and so they proposed a small eptic

527
00:29:45,720 --> 00:29:47,760
Speaker 5: and funding in an effort to address that.

528
00:29:48,240 --> 00:29:50,800
Speaker 2: I mean, on the whole, does Congress usually give the

529
00:29:50,880 --> 00:29:54,200
Speaker 2: judiciary what it asked for in these budget requests.

530
00:29:54,600 --> 00:29:55,840
Speaker 4: We've been seeing that. Recently.

531
00:29:55,960 --> 00:29:58,880
Speaker 5: We saw Congress, for example, match the judiciary's court security

532
00:29:58,920 --> 00:30:02,560
Speaker 5: request past year. I think the challenge for the Judiciary

533
00:30:02,600 --> 00:30:04,480
Speaker 5: and really for all of the government is that Congress

534
00:30:04,480 --> 00:30:06,840
Speaker 5: has a hard time passing funding bills on time, and

535
00:30:06,880 --> 00:30:09,600
Speaker 5: so there have been situations where the government say shuts

536
00:30:09,640 --> 00:30:12,520
Speaker 5: down for several months. That's already happened multiple times, and

537
00:30:12,560 --> 00:30:15,600
Speaker 5: that really aggravated the situation for the CGA Panel lawyers.

538
00:30:15,880 --> 00:30:17,600
Speaker 5: They ran out of money in the summer, thinking they

539
00:30:17,600 --> 00:30:18,720
Speaker 5: only had to make it to the end of the

540
00:30:18,720 --> 00:30:21,360
Speaker 5: fiscal year, ended up getting pushed into November.

541
00:30:21,680 --> 00:30:22,840
Speaker 4: So that's been one challenge.

542
00:30:22,840 --> 00:30:25,480
Speaker 5: And of course we're also seeing these continuing resolutions where

543
00:30:25,840 --> 00:30:29,200
Speaker 5: say inflation increases, the judiciary needs an increase at the

544
00:30:29,240 --> 00:30:30,800
Speaker 5: end of every year, saying, as you may get a

545
00:30:30,840 --> 00:30:33,960
Speaker 5: cola bump on your salary, and instead we have a

546
00:30:33,960 --> 00:30:37,320
Speaker 5: continuing resolution or just a stopgap measure that extends current funds.

547
00:30:37,640 --> 00:30:39,400
Speaker 4: The judiciary or anyone would say.

548
00:30:39,200 --> 00:30:41,760
Speaker 5: That that's an effective budget cut given inflation to have

549
00:30:41,840 --> 00:30:43,880
Speaker 5: funding the same. So some of it has just been

550
00:30:43,880 --> 00:30:46,080
Speaker 5: the challenge of Congress getting bills passed in a time.

551
00:30:46,000 --> 00:30:48,200
Speaker 2: Of manner Suzam. Before I let you go, I want

552
00:30:48,240 --> 00:30:52,680
Speaker 2: you to tell us about this interesting court struggle where

553
00:30:52,680 --> 00:30:56,600
Speaker 2: the Justice Department told a federal appeals court that a

554
00:30:56,640 --> 00:31:02,760
Speaker 2: government lawyer shouldn't have been penalized for ice violating court

555
00:31:02,880 --> 00:31:06,160
Speaker 2: orders because he doesn't control the agency.

556
00:31:06,720 --> 00:31:10,200
Speaker 5: The issues stemmed from what you may remember, Operation Metro Surge,

557
00:31:10,200 --> 00:31:13,840
Speaker 5: where we saw this heightened immigration enforcement presence across the country,

558
00:31:13,880 --> 00:31:16,080
Speaker 5: but really in particular, we saw it kind of reached

559
00:31:16,120 --> 00:31:18,640
Speaker 5: new heights in Minnesota, where, of course we saw the

560
00:31:18,720 --> 00:31:22,560
Speaker 5: killing of two American citizens by federal immigration agents, a

561
00:31:22,600 --> 00:31:24,840
Speaker 5: lot of protests, just a lot of chaos around the

562
00:31:24,880 --> 00:31:29,040
Speaker 5: immigration presence there. Related to that immigration enforcement action, naturally,

563
00:31:29,080 --> 00:31:32,200
Speaker 5: we saw a number of people being detained in Minnesota,

564
00:31:32,440 --> 00:31:35,440
Speaker 5: immigrants being held in immigration attention, and as a result,

565
00:31:35,520 --> 00:31:38,560
Speaker 5: we saw sort of a surge in filings known as habeas,

566
00:31:38,640 --> 00:31:41,400
Speaker 5: petitions for them to be released from detention. That's both

567
00:31:41,440 --> 00:31:44,320
Speaker 5: because of the enforcement actions and because of an interpretation

568
00:31:44,480 --> 00:31:48,280
Speaker 5: the federal government the Trump administration has been using regarding

569
00:31:48,280 --> 00:31:52,000
Speaker 5: the detention statutes, so justified detaining more people as opposed

570
00:31:52,040 --> 00:31:55,520
Speaker 5: to allowing some people to be released pending proceedings. So

571
00:31:55,720 --> 00:31:57,600
Speaker 5: we sort of had that combination where we had this

572
00:31:58,320 --> 00:32:01,360
Speaker 5: surge of case filings and that has overwhelmed the US

573
00:32:01,400 --> 00:32:04,600
Speaker 5: Attorney's Office, the federal prosecutors in Minnesota, and it kind

574
00:32:04,600 --> 00:32:07,040
Speaker 5: of created a bit of this perfect storm for the

575
00:32:07,120 --> 00:32:10,560
Speaker 5: office where we saw a Minnesota federal judge held a

576
00:32:10,600 --> 00:32:13,840
Speaker 5: special Assistant US Attorney in a civil contempt at court

577
00:32:14,160 --> 00:32:16,800
Speaker 5: because an order wasn't followed, and a detained immigrant who

578
00:32:16,840 --> 00:32:20,120
Speaker 5: was supposed to be released in Minnesota with his driver's

579
00:32:20,120 --> 00:32:23,600
Speaker 5: license identification documents was released in Texas with none of

580
00:32:23,600 --> 00:32:26,080
Speaker 5: those documents, obviously leaving him in a very difficult position

581
00:32:26,160 --> 00:32:28,360
Speaker 5: to be released in a state where you don't know

582
00:32:28,400 --> 00:32:31,160
Speaker 5: anybody potentially and don't even have your driver's license.

583
00:32:32,120 --> 00:32:35,600
Speaker 2: And this occurrence wasn't a one off. The judge gave

584
00:32:36,080 --> 00:32:39,760
Speaker 2: an order about where the immigrant had to be released

585
00:32:39,920 --> 00:32:43,240
Speaker 2: and the papers he had to be released with, because

586
00:32:43,280 --> 00:32:47,160
Speaker 2: it's happened so many times that ICE releases an immigrant

587
00:32:47,240 --> 00:32:50,360
Speaker 2: from the facility they're being held in and that could

588
00:32:50,360 --> 00:32:53,760
Speaker 2: be across the country from where they live or where

589
00:32:53,760 --> 00:32:57,800
Speaker 2: they were arrested, and without their personal belongings or papers.

590
00:32:58,320 --> 00:33:00,840
Speaker 2: So this isn't an isolation needed incident.

591
00:33:01,280 --> 00:33:02,120
Speaker 4: Yeah, far from it.

592
00:33:02,320 --> 00:33:05,640
Speaker 5: We've seen federal judges express a lot of frustration at

593
00:33:05,720 --> 00:33:09,680
Speaker 5: ice for their lack of compliance. You could argue with

594
00:33:09,880 --> 00:33:13,320
Speaker 5: some of these orders, we're seeing government attorneys saying, we're overwhelmed,

595
00:33:13,360 --> 00:33:16,160
Speaker 5: We're doing our best, and so that's been a dynamic

596
00:33:16,200 --> 00:33:18,280
Speaker 5: that we're seeing in federal courts across the country. And

597
00:33:18,280 --> 00:33:20,920
Speaker 5: in Minnesota, which as I mentioned, really saw this increase

598
00:33:20,960 --> 00:33:23,840
Speaker 5: in enforcement and arrests and attentions, we saw the chief

599
00:33:23,920 --> 00:33:26,600
Speaker 5: judge of that court specifically call out the government for

600
00:33:26,680 --> 00:33:30,040
Speaker 5: having violated It was something like over one hundred court orders.

601
00:33:30,000 --> 00:33:31,600
Speaker 4: In these immigration habeas cases.

602
00:33:31,960 --> 00:33:34,200
Speaker 5: So well, what did make this unique was that had

603
00:33:34,320 --> 00:33:36,520
Speaker 5: risen to the level of the judge actually holding an

604
00:33:36,600 --> 00:33:40,240
Speaker 5: individual lawyer in civil contempt a court we'd seen judges

605
00:33:40,280 --> 00:33:42,280
Speaker 5: threatened to do so and say, if you don't follow

606
00:33:42,320 --> 00:33:45,120
Speaker 5: this order, rectify the situation by the state. You know,

607
00:33:45,120 --> 00:33:47,160
Speaker 5: I'm going to have content proceedings. But in that case

608
00:33:47,200 --> 00:33:50,520
Speaker 5: the agency has usually you know, gone and fixed the issue.

609
00:33:50,680 --> 00:33:52,480
Speaker 5: But in this case of what made it somewhat unique

610
00:33:52,480 --> 00:33:55,200
Speaker 5: was that the lawyer was held in civil contempt. Of course,

611
00:33:55,280 --> 00:33:57,640
Speaker 5: the issue was rectified pretty quickly and he never actually

612
00:33:57,680 --> 00:34:00,680
Speaker 5: ended up needing to pay any fines unless there was

613
00:34:00,760 --> 00:34:04,000
Speaker 5: still a contempt order, and that's what's now currently on appeal.

614
00:34:04,560 --> 00:34:08,280
Speaker 2: What's unusual to me is the government in its response

615
00:34:08,440 --> 00:34:13,319
Speaker 2: brief saying that, you know, the attorney doesn't control the

616
00:34:13,600 --> 00:34:17,759
Speaker 2: ICE agency, which is true, but the attorney has a

617
00:34:17,920 --> 00:34:22,680
Speaker 2: responsibility to the court that it's representing its client and

618
00:34:22,719 --> 00:34:26,000
Speaker 2: that it is conveying to its client orders.

619
00:34:26,480 --> 00:34:26,920
Speaker 4: Absolutely.

620
00:34:26,960 --> 00:34:29,480
Speaker 5: I think it's an interesting argument, and I think it's

621
00:34:29,520 --> 00:34:31,840
Speaker 5: a unique circumstance. You know, to have to have it

622
00:34:31,880 --> 00:34:33,800
Speaker 5: go as far as the judge holding a government lawyer

623
00:34:33,800 --> 00:34:37,200
Speaker 5: in civil contempt, to have the you know, contempt order purged,

624
00:34:37,239 --> 00:34:39,640
Speaker 5: as they say, when the ideas were returned to the

625
00:34:39,680 --> 00:34:42,520
Speaker 5: detained I regranting question, but to have the Justice Department

626
00:34:42,560 --> 00:34:45,000
Speaker 5: still go ahead and appeal it to the Federal appeals Court.

627
00:34:45,160 --> 00:34:48,600
Speaker 5: Just it's an interesting posture just as it stands, and

628
00:34:48,680 --> 00:34:51,280
Speaker 5: it is an interesting argument that essentially, as you recap

629
00:34:51,360 --> 00:34:54,440
Speaker 5: that the Justice Department is making the claim that you know,

630
00:34:54,600 --> 00:34:57,560
Speaker 5: this lawyer who's actually a military lawyer has been detailed

631
00:34:57,600 --> 00:35:00,000
Speaker 5: to the Minnesota US Attorney's office to handle these cases,

632
00:35:00,680 --> 00:35:05,560
Speaker 5: cannot guarantee agency compliance and shouldn't be essentially expected.

633
00:35:05,120 --> 00:35:09,080
Speaker 2: To since the contempt order has been purged. What are

634
00:35:09,080 --> 00:35:09,719
Speaker 2: they appealing?

635
00:35:10,120 --> 00:35:12,719
Speaker 5: That's what is one of the threshold issues here in

636
00:35:12,760 --> 00:35:15,320
Speaker 5: this brief. Essentially they appealed, the other side moved to

637
00:35:15,360 --> 00:35:18,200
Speaker 5: dismiss and now the Justice Department it sort of previewed

638
00:35:18,239 --> 00:35:20,680
Speaker 5: its merits argument for us in this latest brief. But

639
00:35:20,719 --> 00:35:23,080
Speaker 5: it's also essentially dealing with a threshold problem, which is

640
00:35:23,120 --> 00:35:25,560
Speaker 5: that the other side is saying that they shouldn't even

641
00:35:25,600 --> 00:35:28,960
Speaker 5: have authority to appeal since the order has been purged.

642
00:35:29,320 --> 00:35:31,600
Speaker 5: They're making the argument that it was essentially not this

643
00:35:31,680 --> 00:35:34,239
Speaker 5: individual lawyer. His name is Matthew is Ahara. It was

644
00:35:34,320 --> 00:35:39,000
Speaker 5: essentially not his decision to decide to resolve the contempt

645
00:35:39,080 --> 00:35:42,080
Speaker 5: order in that way. Generally speaking, if you disagree with

646
00:35:42,080 --> 00:35:44,440
Speaker 5: the contempt order, you could appeal it or you could

647
00:35:44,480 --> 00:35:47,080
Speaker 5: abide by it. And I think the other side had

648
00:35:47,120 --> 00:35:49,000
Speaker 5: made the argument that there is no contempt order now

649
00:35:49,040 --> 00:35:51,640
Speaker 5: to appeal it was purged. They're making the claim that

650
00:35:52,160 --> 00:35:56,040
Speaker 5: Ice was the one who remedied this. This lawyer Iahara

651
00:35:56,160 --> 00:35:58,200
Speaker 5: is not the one who made that decision, so he

652
00:35:58,200 --> 00:36:00,400
Speaker 5: should still have the right to appeal it for him self.

653
00:36:00,960 --> 00:36:04,720
Speaker 5: Warning about potential professional consequences that they're saying could follow

654
00:36:04,760 --> 00:36:07,359
Speaker 5: him in his career, given that he had this order

655
00:36:07,520 --> 00:36:10,680
Speaker 5: once ordered against him, particularly related to security clearance as

656
00:36:10,719 --> 00:36:13,160
Speaker 5: he's a military lawyer as well as too just you know,

657
00:36:13,200 --> 00:36:15,440
Speaker 5: should he want to be applying for a bars or

658
00:36:15,480 --> 00:36:16,120
Speaker 5: something like that.

659
00:36:16,600 --> 00:36:20,800
Speaker 2: I'm so interested to hear what the Eighth Circuit decides

660
00:36:20,800 --> 00:36:23,839
Speaker 2: in this case. Thanks so much for joining me, Suzanne.

661
00:36:24,200 --> 00:36:27,840
Speaker 2: That's Bloomberg Law reporter Suzanne Monyac, and that's it for

662
00:36:27,880 --> 00:36:30,520
Speaker 2: this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can

663
00:36:30,560 --> 00:36:33,759
Speaker 2: always get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law podcast.

664
00:36:34,040 --> 00:36:37,080
Speaker 2: You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at

665
00:36:37,239 --> 00:36:42,279
Speaker 2: www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast slash Law, and

666
00:36:42,360 --> 00:36:45,400
Speaker 2: remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight

667
00:36:45,480 --> 00:36:48,960
Speaker 2: at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso and

668
00:36:49,000 --> 00:36:50,480
Speaker 2: you're listening to Bloomberg