Latest / Bloomberg Law / Sen. Mark Kelly Censured & 92-Year-Old Judge in Maduro Case

Transcript

Sen. Mark Kelly Censured & 92-Year-Old Judge in Maduro Case · Bloomberg Law

0:02
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio.
0:08
Speaker 2: In mid November, Democratic Senator Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain,
0:14
Speaker 2: and five other Democrats, all who served in the military
0:17
Speaker 2: or intelligence services, released a video online in which they
0:22
Speaker 2: reminded US troops they can disobey illegal orders right now.
0:28
Speaker 3: The threats to our constitution aren't just coming from abroad,
0:31
Speaker 3: but from right here at home.
0:32
Speaker 4: Our laws are clear.
0:33
Speaker 3: You can refuse illegal orders. You can refuse illegal orders.
0:38
Speaker 3: You must refuse illegal orders.
0:40
Speaker 2: No one has to carry out orders that violate the
0:43
Speaker 2: law or our constitution. The video garnered millions of views
0:48
Speaker 2: and President Trump's anger on social media. He called the
0:52
Speaker 2: lawmakers traders who should be arrested and put to death,
0:56
Speaker 2: and the administration is not giving up on the issue.
1:00
Speaker 2: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has issued a formal letter of
1:04
Speaker 2: censure against Kelly, with plans to cut his military rank
1:09
Speaker 2: and dock his pension. Kelly, who served more than twenty
1:12
Speaker 2: five years in the Navy, including thirty nine combat missions,
1:17
Speaker 2: said quote, I'll fight this with everything I've got. And
1:20
Speaker 2: Monday night on Comedy Central's The Daily Show, the senator
1:25
Speaker 2: said the fight was not just about him.
1:28
Speaker 3: They're trying to intimidate all of us. Of course, don't
1:32
Speaker 3: say something they don't like, and especially for members of
1:34
Speaker 3: the military, retired members right like me, keep your mouth
1:37
Speaker 3: shut or they're coming after you. They're going to take
1:39
Speaker 3: away your pension. So this is much bigger than they
1:43
Speaker 3: don't make.
1:43
Speaker 2: My guest is Joshua Castenberg, a professor at the University
1:47
Speaker 2: of New Mexico Law School. He was both a judge
1:50
Speaker 2: and a prosecutor in the US Air Force. Josh in
1:54
Speaker 2: the censure letter, heg Seth said that Kelly had directly
1:58
Speaker 2: attacked the legitimacy of Millie Tarry leadership and the lawfulness
2:02
Speaker 2: of their orders, but that didn't appear to be what
2:06
Speaker 2: was said in that video. Did you find anything objectionable
2:10
Speaker 2: in the video?
2:11
Speaker 1: No, I mean, first of all, with a certain degree
2:15
Speaker 1: I would say of political and legal savvy, everything that
2:20
Speaker 1: was said within the video is legally correct. Military personnel
2:25
Speaker 1: have a duty not to follow unlawful orders. This is
2:30
Speaker 1: fundamentally different than explaining one's idea of what an unlawful
2:35
Speaker 1: order is or what a lawful order is. They put
2:38
Speaker 1: it out there as what some have characterized as rage bait.
2:43
Speaker 1: That's not my characterization, but some have, including in the Senate.
2:48
Speaker 1: So Mark Kelly, as a retiree is subject to recall
2:55
Speaker 1: and court martial and the like. The UCMJ, the Uniform
3:00
Speaker 1: of Military Justice, the governing law of the military, does
3:04
Speaker 1: have a controversial jurisdiction over retirees, and it came into
3:08
Speaker 1: being in eighteen sixty one during an emergency session of Congress.
3:13
Speaker 1: It is very very rare that someone has brought back
3:16
Speaker 1: on active duty and court martialed or discipline, and usually
3:20
Speaker 1: only for things that occurred while they were on active
3:24
Speaker 1: duty or things that directly affect the military, like some
3:27
Speaker 1: retired marine selling cocaine on base to active duty marine.
3:31
Speaker 1: So you see it like that. So this was a
3:33
Speaker 1: highly unusual step to begin with. But what made it
3:36
Speaker 1: more unusual is that Senator Kelly did nothing wrong, and
3:40
Speaker 1: he's a sitting United States senator and correct me if
3:43
Speaker 1: I'm wrong. But we have three independent branches of government,
3:46
Speaker 1: and the reason our government was structured in the way
3:48
Speaker 1: it was was to prevent a tyranny from occurring, such
3:52
Speaker 1: as happened in England when Oliver Cromwell ruled Parliament with
3:56
Speaker 1: the Army back in the seventeen hundreds, and so this
3:59
Speaker 1: sure is a step towards that. No funny enough, the
4:03
Speaker 1: initial threat was to actually do a court martial, and
4:05
Speaker 1: I think the DoD Secretary of Defense Hegseth backed off
4:10
Speaker 1: on that because the US District Court would step in
4:14
Speaker 1: and say, no, this is unconstitutional. So then they picked
4:18
Speaker 1: an administrative route. And what is a letter of censure? Well,
4:23
Speaker 1: for someone who's on actual active duty, this could be
4:26
Speaker 1: career ending. But since Captain Mark Kelly, Navy captain, which
4:31
Speaker 1: is the equivalent of a colonel, is retired. The letter
4:34
Speaker 1: of censure at this point, without more, is nothing more
4:38
Speaker 1: than your third grade teacher telling you she or he's
4:40
Speaker 1: unhappy with you that day.
4:42
Speaker 2: Heigseth said that this is part of the process, the
4:47
Speaker 2: letter of censure. So what happens next is Hegseth the
4:50
Speaker 2: one to decide what the next step is? Is there
4:54
Speaker 2: an investigation?
4:56
Speaker 1: So what could happen? And some media pundits and Secretary
5:02
Speaker 1: of Defense Hegseth himself has said this is that they
5:07
Speaker 1: may pursue what's known as an officer grade reduction. What's
5:11
Speaker 1: problematic about that is that officers cannot be reduced in
5:15
Speaker 1: grade by a court martial. However, the Secretary of the
5:20
Speaker 1: Navy or the Secretary of Defense can always do an
5:23
Speaker 1: officer grade determination if it is determined that someone should
5:27
Speaker 1: not have been promoted based on criminal or other types
5:33
Speaker 1: of deleterious activity while on active duty or reserve or
5:38
Speaker 1: guard duty that had the promotion board known of, they
5:41
Speaker 1: wouldn't have gotten promoted. So for example, someone cheating on
5:45
Speaker 1: an exam if it's discovered years later, someone who'd been
5:48
Speaker 1: court martialed, someone who committed conduct on becoming an officer,
5:52
Speaker 1: like fraternizing with junior enlisted members, things like that. You know,
5:57
Speaker 1: I've represented a major who was once to captain because
6:02
Speaker 1: it came to light that he was engaged in sexual
6:05
Speaker 1: conduct and activity with two enlisted women under his direct
6:09
Speaker 1: command earlier, which is a UCUMJ violation. But generally those
6:14
Speaker 1: officer grade reductions are thought of as things that occurred
6:17
Speaker 1: on active duty. And Senator Mark Kelly is not on
6:21
Speaker 1: active duty. He's a retiree, so that could create a
6:24
Speaker 1: legal issue, but you'd have to get through the hurdle
6:27
Speaker 1: of one what he said was technically correct, and so
6:32
Speaker 1: there's a first Amendment and a truth defense built into that,
6:35
Speaker 1: and he could still fight the reduction in US district
6:38
Speaker 1: court or in the Court of Claims. And two, you know,
6:42
Speaker 1: you really have to go back to the separation of powers.
6:45
Speaker 1: What authority does the Secretary of Defense really have over
6:49
Speaker 1: a sitting United States Senator? And the answer to that
6:53
Speaker 1: is not much, and it would be unprecedented to try
6:56
Speaker 1: to do something. My sense of what happened is a
6:59
Speaker 1: few attorneys that the administration has actually listened to have
7:03
Speaker 1: told him you won't survive a court martial. Here's the
7:07
Speaker 1: things we think you could get away with, and it's
7:09
Speaker 1: the letter of censure and probably nothing more.
7:12
Speaker 2: There's also the Speech and Debate Clause for members of Congress.
7:16
Speaker 1: Yeah, so I've done an investigation into that. The Speech
7:19
Speaker 1: and Debate Clause protects individuals who are elected to Congress
7:25
Speaker 1: or the Senate for what they say and do on
7:28
Speaker 1: the floor of the Senate or the House and within
7:31
Speaker 1: the official business of the House or Senate, meaning you know,
7:34
Speaker 1: committee work and investigations and the like. But the speech
7:39
Speaker 1: and Debate Clause has not been held to extend as
7:43
Speaker 1: far as what Senator Kelly and the others have done.
7:48
Speaker 1: I suppose you could make an argument that because they're
7:52
Speaker 1: speaking on a matter of public concern in their official
7:56
Speaker 1: capacity elected capacities as members of the Article one branch
8:01
Speaker 1: of the government, maybe it extends that far. But I
8:03
Speaker 1: actually think that's the weakest of the arguments that have
8:06
Speaker 1: been raised.
8:08
Speaker 2: Is this move by HEG sith precedent setting. I couldn't
8:12
Speaker 2: find anything similar when I did some research.
8:16
Speaker 1: There has been a long, long history of retired generals
8:21
Speaker 1: and admirals and other senior individuals you know who've spoken
8:24
Speaker 1: on public matters. During the height of the Vietnam War,
8:28
Speaker 1: decorated and heroic generals like General James Gavin, Marine Corps
8:33
Speaker 1: General David Shupe spoke out against the Vietnam conflict and
8:38
Speaker 1: outright accused Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon of Lyne, even
8:41
Speaker 1: David Hackett, who Nixon wanted to go after, but John
8:45
Speaker 1: Dean as attorney, told him, you can't do that. There
8:48
Speaker 1: have been hundreds of veterans who served in the House,
8:52
Speaker 1: in the Senate, and in the Article three branch of government,
8:55
Speaker 1: you know, the federal judiciary, and as governors, many of
8:58
Speaker 1: whom have criticized the press and other matters, and yet
9:02
Speaker 1: no no one's ever tried. No Secretary of Defense or
9:06
Speaker 1: service secretary has ever done this move. It's been on precedented.
9:10
Speaker 1: They've made the front page of the New York Times
9:13
Speaker 1: or CBS Evening News and the like, and you know,
9:17
Speaker 1: I think about it, and I think, Gee, if Richard
9:19
Speaker 1: Nixon did nothing to David Hackett, a retired decorated colonel
9:24
Speaker 1: who got his start his career in World War Two
9:26
Speaker 1: and ended it in the Vietnam conflict, then that's kind
9:30
Speaker 1: of a barometer of where we should be. But this
9:33
Speaker 1: administration has crossed well over that threshold.
9:37
Speaker 2: All six of the lawmakers who appeared in that video
9:40
Speaker 2: served in the military or the intelligence branches. Why did
9:43
Speaker 2: they pick on Kelly in particular.
9:46
Speaker 1: Because Kelly's the only one who's subject of the uniform
9:49
Speaker 1: coulde of military justice. The others served in the military,
9:52
Speaker 1: but they're not collecting a retirement, they didn't go the
9:54
Speaker 1: full twenty years, or they served in intelligence operations but
9:58
Speaker 1: not in the military. Well, actually, the administration has attempted
10:02
Speaker 1: to silence them. When FBI Director Cash Ptel said, well,
10:05
Speaker 1: we're going to investigate them for sedition. Really, I think
10:08
Speaker 1: that that is not even close to a definition of sedition.
10:13
Speaker 1: I think if I were in the Pentagon as a
10:16
Speaker 1: judge advocate and someone asked me to give a legal
10:20
Speaker 1: review on this, my legal review would read something like this.
10:25
Speaker 1: I cannot in good conscience draft a letter of censure
10:30
Speaker 1: to a sitting United States Senator under these conditions, because
10:35
Speaker 1: the framers of our constitution, the whole construct of our
10:38
Speaker 1: Republican form of government is premised on the principle that
10:42
Speaker 1: we will have no dictatorship like Oliver Cromwell. And the
10:47
Speaker 1: idea that we can use the military to silence a
10:50
Speaker 1: city United States senator that we find disagreeable is so
10:55
Speaker 1: anathetical to the constitutional values which we have in the
10:59
Speaker 1: military that I would ask you to find someone else
11:02
Speaker 1: to do it in my place.
11:04
Speaker 2: Well, let's see what happens here. Hegseth said that Kelly
11:07
Speaker 2: has thirty days to submit a response, and the process
11:11
Speaker 2: to downgrade his retirement rank will be completed within forty
11:16
Speaker 2: five days. Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show,
11:20
Speaker 2: thousands of federal agents have been deployed to Minneapolis, Minnesota.
11:25
Speaker 2: Why there are no National Guard troops among them? I'm
11:29
Speaker 2: June Grosso. When you're listening to Bloomberg. Thousands of federal
11:34
Speaker 2: agents have been deployed to Minneapolis, Minnesota, the latest Democratic
11:39
Speaker 2: city targeted by the Trump administration for mass deportations, following
11:45
Speaker 2: operations in Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland. However, unlike those cities,
11:51
Speaker 2: the administration is not deploying National Guard troops under the
11:56
Speaker 2: guise of high crime rates and the need to protect
11:59
Speaker 2: federal off officials involved in immigration enforcement. In fact, President
12:04
Speaker 2: Trump is backing off, at least for now, on his
12:07
Speaker 2: push to deploy the National Guard, pulling troops out of
12:11
Speaker 2: those three cities. This after legal roadblocks, including one from
12:15
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court, a rare setback for Trump at the
12:19
Speaker 2: High Court, but he warned that quote, we will come
12:23
Speaker 2: back if crime begins to soar again. I've been talking
12:26
Speaker 2: to Professor Joshua Castenberg of the University of New Mexico
12:30
Speaker 2: Law School. Josh do you think the administration saw that
12:34
Speaker 2: the legal deck was sort of stacked against them?
12:38
Speaker 1: You know, I think they read the tea leaves, and
12:41
Speaker 1: the tea leaves were the last Supreme Court decision not
12:47
Speaker 1: to immediately overturn or put in abands the temporary restraining
12:53
Speaker 1: order in regard to Chicago that the Seventh Circuit came
12:57
Speaker 1: up with, and you know, Alito and Thomas dissented, but
13:04
Speaker 1: you did have this decision that was issued that at
13:08
Speaker 1: least tepidly included Cavanaugh because he had a concurrence, but
13:13
Speaker 1: it also had Barrett in it and Chief Justice John
13:16
Speaker 1: Roberts as well. And so I think they read the
13:18
Speaker 1: tea leaves and pulled out the military and the hopes
13:21
Speaker 1: that mootness, which is a fundamental principle of constitutional law,
13:26
Speaker 1: will prevent any further review. At this time, that six.
13:30
Speaker 2: To three decision was really one of the first times
13:34
Speaker 2: in this second Trump administration that the Supreme Court has
13:38
Speaker 2: stopped Trump on the emergency docket.
13:41
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think there's the tariff issue coming up, and
13:44
Speaker 1: that may be a pullback too, but that's a fundamentally
13:48
Speaker 1: different issue. It's purely economic and where the power to
13:52
Speaker 1: regulate the economy foreign economy rests.
13:55
Speaker 2: As far as sending in troops, Trump said, we'll come back,
14:00
Speaker 2: perhaps in a much different and stronger form. When crime
14:03
Speaker 2: begins to soar again.
14:05
Speaker 1: Well, you know, it's always the threat. And I can
14:11
Speaker 1: tell you that in talking to people who have served
14:15
Speaker 1: in the military as well as others. The concern is
14:18
Speaker 1: they'll be you know, there'll be a city with the
14:21
Speaker 1: tends to vote Democrat with a higher crime rate than
14:25
Speaker 1: the norm, and the operation will occur shortly before the
14:30
Speaker 1: midterm elections. And if you think about cities in purple
14:34
Speaker 1: states where voting might make a difference, could that happen
14:38
Speaker 1: in a place like Detroit or certainly Minneapolis now particularly Yeah,
14:43
Speaker 1: because the fiasco of Governor waltz up there may actually
14:49
Speaker 1: give the Republicans a shot at doing well in the midterms.
14:53
Speaker 1: And so I could see some people in the White
14:57
Speaker 1: House thinking this is where we're going to send troops next.
15:02
Speaker 2: Also, Trump rather recently once again seemed to be toying
15:06
Speaker 2: with the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act.
15:11
Speaker 1: Well, the court did leave that open, you know, I
15:14
Speaker 1: mean the White House, And this is something every listener
15:17
Speaker 1: should understand. The White House argued there was an inherent
15:22
Speaker 1: presidential authority to do what he did, but they didn't
15:25
Speaker 1: cite to any direct language in the Constitution or any statutes.
15:29
Speaker 1: There is the Insurrection Act statute, and the Insurrection Act
15:33
Speaker 1: makes it very clear that if the laws of the
15:36
Speaker 1: land are unenforceable, and that the Civil government cannot enforce
15:41
Speaker 1: the law. The president can use the military as a
15:45
Speaker 1: police force in those cities. Now, to me, that's a
15:49
Speaker 1: very high bar. But I could see others making the
15:54
Speaker 1: argument of, well, no, you know, there's a backlog of
15:57
Speaker 1: cases and the local police don't have enough people to
16:00
Speaker 1: do their job, even though they are doing their job.
16:03
Speaker 1: And I could see that occurring too.
16:06
Speaker 2: So, I mean, what do you think the broad principle
16:09
Speaker 2: of the Supreme Court's decision stands for?
16:12
Speaker 1: Well, I think the Supreme Court's decisions broad principle is
16:15
Speaker 1: you don't have unfettered power, mister Trump, and you've got
16:18
Speaker 1: to have more you know, you've got to have more
16:20
Speaker 1: fact on your side, and you have to have a
16:22
Speaker 1: statute that is open for you to do it. And
16:24
Speaker 1: the insurrect Act is such a statute that.
16:28
Speaker 2: Of course would start another round of litigation. I'm sure.
16:32
Speaker 2: Always a pleasure to have you on, josh Thanks so much.
16:35
Speaker 2: That's professor Joshua Castenberg of the University of New Mexico
16:39
Speaker 2: Law School, coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show.
16:42
Speaker 2: The judge overseeing the Nicholas Maduro prosecution is a ninety
16:47
Speaker 2: two year old native New Yorker who's willing to take
16:50
Speaker 2: unpopular stances, is unafraid to challenge lawyers, and has managed
16:55
Speaker 2: to win praise from President Trump despite crossing him on issues.
17:01
Speaker 2: I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. Ousted Venezuelan
17:08
Speaker 2: president Nicholas Maduro was defiant in his first court appearance
17:12
Speaker 2: on federal drug trafficking charges on Monday, Attempting to tell
17:17
Speaker 2: the story of his capture by US forces in a
17:20
Speaker 2: stunning raid, Maduro said, quote, I am here kidnapped since
17:25
Speaker 2: January third, Saturday. I was captured at my home in Caracas.
17:30
Speaker 2: But before he could go further, the judge cut him off, saying,
17:34
Speaker 2: at this point in time, I only want to know
17:37
Speaker 2: one thing. Are you Nicholas Maduro Morros? And with that,
17:42
Speaker 2: Manhattan Federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein showed Muduro who was in
17:46
Speaker 2: charge in his courtroom at ninety two years old. With
17:50
Speaker 2: thirty eight years on the bench, Judge Hellerstein has shown
17:54
Speaker 2: an independent streak and no fear of taking unpopular positions.
18:00
Speaker 2: Mean is Bloomberg Law report of Mike Velenski, who's written
18:03
Speaker 2: a profile on Judge Hellerstein. Mike tell US a little
18:06
Speaker 2: about the background of this Clinton appointee.
18:10
Speaker 4: So Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, he's a District Court judge
18:15
Speaker 4: in Manhattan in the US History Court for the Southern
18:18
Speaker 4: District of New York. He's a character there. I mean,
18:21
Speaker 4: he's ninety two years old, he's been on the bench
18:23
Speaker 4: about three decades. Kind of gives you the impression, you know,
18:28
Speaker 4: he's seen it all, he's heard it all. He's one
18:30
Speaker 4: of those judges. And in fact, he's had a pretty
18:33
Speaker 4: incredible career as far as interesting cases, going back to
18:38
Speaker 4: allowing the KKK to march to New York City in
18:41
Speaker 4: the nineties, through several high profile cases involving the financial sector.
18:47
Speaker 4: He oversaw the Charlie Javis trial, he oversaw the Bill
18:50
Speaker 4: Wang trial, and recently has even before being handed the
18:54
Speaker 4: Maduro case, has gotten a bunch of politically sensitive cases
18:57
Speaker 4: involving the President Trump to.
19:00
Speaker 2: Talk about some of those cases because he ruled against
19:03
Speaker 2: the Trump administration in one case, and then he ruled
19:06
Speaker 2: against Trump personally in another.
19:10
Speaker 4: The case against the administration, which also directly involved Venezuela,
19:15
Speaker 4: was an early effort by the administration to quickly deport
19:19
Speaker 4: alleged Venezuelan gang members under a very old statute called
19:24
Speaker 4: the Alien Enemies Act that the Trump administration kind of
19:28
Speaker 4: dusted off to create these sped up deportations, and Judge
19:35
Speaker 4: Hellerstein stopped it effectively. He issued an injunction saying that
19:41
Speaker 4: due process was needed, they needed notice, they needed a hearing,
19:44
Speaker 4: and that the administration was trying to kind of circumvent
19:47
Speaker 4: the legal rules of due process.
19:50
Speaker 2: I didn't realize that Judge Hellerstein was involved in the
19:54
Speaker 2: Trump hush money case and in fact is still involved
19:57
Speaker 2: in it. Tell us what happened to Yeah.
20:00
Speaker 4: So that case is before him now. So twice the
20:04
Speaker 4: president tried to get that case into federal court. It
20:07
Speaker 4: was tried in Manhattan State Court by District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
20:11
Speaker 4: But Trump has repeatedly said, you know, and his legal
20:15
Speaker 4: team has said it belongs in federal court. It involves
20:18
Speaker 4: issues of presidential duties, and twice Judge Hellerstein said, no,
20:24
Speaker 4: it doesn't, and in quite blunt terms, said, you know,
20:27
Speaker 4: paying an adult film star has nothing to do with
20:29
Speaker 4: your role as president. This is a state case. This
20:32
Speaker 4: belongs in state court. Interestingly, he was essentially overturned by
20:37
Speaker 4: the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently
20:40
Speaker 4: which said they're not taking a position on whether the
20:42
Speaker 4: case belongs in state or federal court, but that Judge
20:45
Speaker 4: Hellerstein didn't adequately probe whether the US Supreme Court decision
20:51
Speaker 4: on this topic means that this case should potentially be
20:55
Speaker 4: in federal court. So he has the case again now
20:58
Speaker 4: with Trump and his legal team trying to get it
21:00
Speaker 4: into federal courten Hill again rule on whether or not
21:03
Speaker 4: it should be.
21:04
Speaker 2: And unusual for President Trump, who often criticizes the judges
21:10
Speaker 2: he's in front of or the administration is in front of.
21:12
Speaker 2: He said, quote, the judge is very respected. We'll see
21:16
Speaker 2: how we do. We're going to go through a slog
21:19
Speaker 2: of a trial.
21:20
Speaker 4: He's one of the few judges that come to mind
21:23
Speaker 4: that Trump has actually said kind things about, at least
21:26
Speaker 4: on Air Force One on Sunday. But you know it's
21:29
Speaker 4: early days, so we will see how how that relationship
21:33
Speaker 4: plays out.
21:33
Speaker 2: You know, Trump mentioned a slog of a trial, and
21:36
Speaker 2: this is going to be a long trial. So as
21:38
Speaker 2: a senior judge, Judge Hellerstein could have refused the trial.
21:43
Speaker 4: Yes, and he still can voluntarily give up the case
21:48
Speaker 4: if he doesn't want it under what I understand to
21:51
Speaker 4: be the rules of the Southern District. But he has
21:54
Speaker 4: the case because he was already overseeing a case involving
21:58
Speaker 4: one of Maduro's co defendants. He's already plied guilty a
22:02
Speaker 4: former Venezuelan intelligence chief who is in the US and
22:06
Speaker 4: pled guilty. So that was a mature of code defendant,
22:08
Speaker 4: and from my understanding, that's how heller Scene ended up
22:11
Speaker 4: with this case. He could voluntarily give it up, but
22:13
Speaker 4: he's given no indications that he wishes to, And given
22:16
Speaker 4: his history of presiding over high profile cases, it doesn't
22:20
Speaker 4: seem like he's a judge who would be at all
22:22
Speaker 4: intimidated by that part of it.
22:24
Speaker 2: So it's unusual to have a ninety two year old
22:27
Speaker 2: judge frankly does his age show in the courtroom.
22:30
Speaker 4: Not really, No, I mean, so he seems sharp, he
22:33
Speaker 4: seems alert. He's still from what I've seen of him
22:37
Speaker 4: and from what I've heard mother lawyers, he's still a
22:39
Speaker 4: sharp legal mind. Where it my show is just a
22:43
Speaker 4: little bit of like crankiness, you know, as one lawyer.
22:47
Speaker 4: But and as I've observed, like he'll tell a lawyer
22:50
Speaker 4: you're being boring. You know, if a lawyer objects beyond
22:55
Speaker 4: just you know, sustaining or over ruling, he'll say there's
22:58
Speaker 4: nothing objectionable here. He can kind of snap. And if
23:02
Speaker 4: you associate that kind of contankerous quality with age, perhaps
23:05
Speaker 4: he has that. But one of the lawyers said to me,
23:08
Speaker 4: you know, Judge Soup been on the bench that long
23:10
Speaker 4: at some point get like that because they've they've seen
23:13
Speaker 4: heard everything. But this is a case that even Judge
23:16
Speaker 4: Hellerstein at ninety two has never seen or heard before,
23:19
Speaker 4: so he will be engaged.
23:22
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think the crankiness may be more about having
23:25
Speaker 2: been on the bench so long that you've seen and
23:27
Speaker 2: heard just about everything from lawyers after almost four decades,
23:32
Speaker 2: and you have a unique view of what's going on
23:34
Speaker 2: in the courtroom. So Judge Hellerstein said to lawyers in
23:38
Speaker 2: the Archa Ghost trial, the jury looks like it's bored
23:42
Speaker 2: to tears. I think you should stick to what's important.
23:45
Speaker 4: Please.
23:46
Speaker 2: That actually sounds like good advice because judges are very
23:49
Speaker 2: attuned to jurors.
23:51
Speaker 4: Yeah, he gave lawyers in that trial several tips, even
23:55
Speaker 4: like kind of telling them how he would suggest say,
23:58
Speaker 4: phrase questions things like that. So he has the kind
24:01
Speaker 4: of paternal quality towards towards the younger lawyers sometimes and
24:05
Speaker 4: maybe it can come off kurt or sharp at moments,
24:09
Speaker 4: but he does appear to actually kind of be giving guidance,
24:12
Speaker 4: you know, as a kind of legal sage at his age.
24:16
Speaker 4: He does appear to be giving advice to the lawyers
24:18
Speaker 4: at times.
24:19
Speaker 2: You talk to the New York County Lawyers Association President
24:22
Speaker 2: Richard Swanson, who said he's a real believer in due process.
24:26
Speaker 2: He's not going to be swayed by politics. If anything,
24:28
Speaker 2: Maduro should be glad he has a fair judge.
24:32
Speaker 4: Yeah, A lot of the lawyers I spoke with, especially
24:34
Speaker 4: lawyers and positions of leadership, feel like Judge Hellerstein will
24:38
Speaker 4: kind of set a positive model in terms of giving
24:42
Speaker 4: a fair shape to someone in a US court and
24:46
Speaker 4: where it's politically, you know, so sensitive but the world
24:50
Speaker 4: is watching. But all the lawyers I spoke with felt
24:53
Speaker 4: like Judge Hellerstein is the right judge for that role
24:57
Speaker 4: and that he wouldn't be impacted by by the politics
25:01
Speaker 4: or the public profile of this case.
25:04
Speaker 2: Maduro seemed to be defiant and trying to take control
25:08
Speaker 2: a little bit of the courtroom, and Judge Hellerstein, when
25:12
Speaker 2: he said I'm the president, said well, we'll get to that.
25:14
Speaker 2: He seemed to try to keep him a check. So
25:17
Speaker 2: does he run a tight courtroom.
25:19
Speaker 4: Yeah, he is known to run a tight courtroom. He
25:21
Speaker 4: likes to keep things moving. I think yesterday he really
25:25
Speaker 4: wanted to make sure that they got done only what
25:28
Speaker 4: they needed to get done and no more is my
25:31
Speaker 4: sense from what I've seen of that. Also, I did
25:33
Speaker 4: speak with a sketch artist who was in the courtroom
25:36
Speaker 4: who has done this for many years, and she was
25:39
Speaker 4: telling me, you know, even having sketched Trump himself in court,
25:43
Speaker 4: John Gotti, all these big players, there was still really
25:47
Speaker 4: this sense of like history in the courtroom, and that
25:51
Speaker 4: Maduro walked in not so much like a defendant but
25:54
Speaker 4: like a leader of a state, and that he really
25:58
Speaker 4: had a certain presence. And I think that Judge Hellerstein
26:02
Speaker 4: probably wanted to make sure that this still runs the
26:05
Speaker 4: way Cortin is supposed to. This isn't a geopolitical meeting, right,
26:09
Speaker 4: It's a criminal case.
26:11
Speaker 2: Maduro and his wife are potentially facing life sentences. Here
26:16
Speaker 2: is Judge Hellerstein known for being tough at sentencing or
26:20
Speaker 2: more lenient.
26:21
Speaker 4: I would say somewhere down the middle. There are a
26:23
Speaker 4: couple of cases. Charlie Javis case, so the government had
26:26
Speaker 4: asked for twelve years, and he gave her seven, and
26:30
Speaker 4: even told her at sentencing he said something to the
26:32
Speaker 4: effect of like, you've done a bad thing, but you're
26:34
Speaker 4: a good person. So he does have this seemingly empathetic
26:38
Speaker 4: side that comes out at Sendancing sometimes.
26:41
Speaker 2: Tell us about some of the cases earlier in his
26:44
Speaker 2: career that helped him build his reputation as a judge.
26:48
Speaker 4: There were a couple of cases from kind of early
26:50
Speaker 4: in his tenure that jumped out to me. One this
26:53
Speaker 4: case involving the KKK, where he was actually overturned. He
26:56
Speaker 4: ruled that they could march wearing their masks, and this
26:59
Speaker 4: was believe that Giuliani era. This was the nineties, very
27:02
Speaker 4: controversial case. They were ultimately from what I read and recalled,
27:07
Speaker 4: they were allowed to ultimately mark without mass. But it
27:10
Speaker 4: just sort of showed, and I spoke to the a
27:12
Speaker 4: CLU lawyer who represented them, it kind of showed a
27:15
Speaker 4: willingness to uphold the rights of even the most unpopular groups.
27:21
Speaker 4: That could kind of give you a sense of who
27:23
Speaker 4: he is as a judge. There was also a couple
27:26
Speaker 4: of nine to eleven cases that he oversaw. One he
27:30
Speaker 4: rejected a very large settlement for rescue workers, even though
27:34
Speaker 4: the rescue workers at Ground zero had agreed to the settlement.
27:37
Speaker 4: He said they deserved more and made everyone go back
27:40
Speaker 4: to the drawing board, and that was kind of controversial
27:42
Speaker 4: at the time. And another case said he didn't have
27:46
Speaker 4: the power to force the city to give human remains
27:50
Speaker 4: back to nine to eleven families, which was a big
27:53
Speaker 4: disappointment to them, but he really tried to explain that
27:56
Speaker 4: exceeds the limits of his powers. So I guess what
27:59
Speaker 4: I took from all those This is a judge who
28:02
Speaker 4: is firm in his convictions, whether you agree with him
28:05
Speaker 4: or not, and is going to rule the way he
28:07
Speaker 4: really believes is right.
28:09
Speaker 2: And that's just what you want from a judge. And
28:12
Speaker 2: the Maduro case is going to be so complicated, at
28:16
Speaker 2: least in the initial stages of the motion practice, so
28:20
Speaker 2: you need a judge who's sharp and also one who's
28:23
Speaker 2: not afraid to make unpopular rulings. Thanks so much, Mike.
28:27
Speaker 2: That's Bloomberg Law reporter Mike Vilenski, And that's it for
28:31
Speaker 2: this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can
28:34
Speaker 2: always get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast.
28:37
Speaker 2: You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at
28:41
Speaker 2: www dot bloomberg dot com slash podcast Slash Law, And
28:46
Speaker 2: remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight
28:49
Speaker 2: at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso and
28:52
Speaker 2: you're listening to Bloomberg