Latest / Bloomberg Law / Civil Rights Division Upended and Lawyers Exit

Transcript

Civil Rights Division Upended and Lawyers Exit · Bloomberg Law

0:02
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosse from Bloomberg Radio.
0:08
Speaker 2: The new head of the Justice Department Civil Rights Division
0:12
Speaker 2: is upending the mission of the division, which traditionally has
0:15
Speaker 2: been to protect Americans against discrimination based on race, color, religion, sets,
0:21
Speaker 2: and national origin. Harmeit Dillon has abandoned landmark civil rights
0:26
Speaker 2: settlements and has changed the division's focus to combating anti semitism,
0:32
Speaker 2: rooting out anti Christian bias, fighting diversity initiatives, and protecting
0:37
Speaker 2: gun rights. It's led to a mass exodus of attorneys
0:41
Speaker 2: from the division. In an interview with conservative commentator Glenn Beck,
0:46
Speaker 2: Dylan said that more than one hundred division attorneys out
0:49
Speaker 2: of three hundred and eighty have already said they'll leave.
0:53
Speaker 3: I think that's fine, because we don't want people in
0:56
Speaker 3: the federal government who feel like it's their pet project
0:59
Speaker 3: to go personute police departments based on statistical evidence, or
1:04
Speaker 3: persecute people praying outside abortion facilities instead of doing violence.
1:10
Speaker 3: That's not the job here. The job here is to
1:12
Speaker 3: enforce the federal civil rights laws, not woke ideology.
1:16
Speaker 2: Joining Me is Bloomberg Law, reporter Suzanne Mognac start by
1:21
Speaker 2: telling us about the history of this division and its purpose.
1:26
Speaker 4: The Civil Rights Division is part of the Justice Department
1:29
Speaker 4: that was created in nineteen fifty seven as part of
1:31
Speaker 4: the Civil Rights Act that year, and it was really
1:33
Speaker 4: originally at its time intended to protect the right to vote.
1:36
Speaker 4: This is a big problem in SOLF at the time
1:38
Speaker 4: with protecting black residents from being blocked from the polls,
1:41
Speaker 4: and that was sort of the original mission of the unit. Obviously,
1:44
Speaker 4: now it's expanded and it enforces all of the civil
1:47
Speaker 4: rights laws that protect people from being discriminated against based
1:51
Speaker 4: on their sex, their gender, disability, religion, etc.
1:55
Speaker 2: Are they dropping any existing litigation or settlements by the
2:01
Speaker 2: prior administration?
2:02
Speaker 5: Are they dropping anything?
2:04
Speaker 4: Quite a lot, Yes, they're dropping a lot. We've seen
2:08
Speaker 4: withdrawals of consent decrees and just you know, removing themselves
2:11
Speaker 4: from pending litigation. In a lot of different areas that
2:14
Speaker 4: the Biden era Civil Rights Division had handled, One notable
2:17
Speaker 4: one that got quite a lot of traction was an
2:20
Speaker 4: environmental case actually that had been focused on sewage issues
2:24
Speaker 4: in Black Delta and Alabama, where residents have been found
2:27
Speaker 4: to have been discriminated against by their county because they
2:30
Speaker 4: didn't have proper sewage systems, and it had created a
2:33
Speaker 4: health risk for residents in those communities, and that was
2:36
Speaker 4: something that the Trump administrations decided to withdraw from that settlement.
2:40
Speaker 4: And so we've really just seen a lot of withdrawals
2:42
Speaker 4: of settlements but just don't align with what the Trump
2:45
Speaker 4: administration's missions are when it comes to the types of
2:48
Speaker 4: civil rights that they're interested in enforcing.
2:50
Speaker 2: In that Alabama case, the settlement had already been reached, right,
2:54
Speaker 2: that's correct, So now what is the general new mission statement?
2:59
Speaker 4: The Justice Department had actually sent out new mission statements
3:03
Speaker 4: for the civil rights divisions different sections. To take it broadly,
3:07
Speaker 4: a lot of the common threads that we saw throughout
3:09
Speaker 4: the new section mission statements were a focus on anti semitism,
3:13
Speaker 4: really specifically on college campuses, but focus on protecting women
3:17
Speaker 4: from quote unquote gender ideology, and really specifically what that
3:20
Speaker 4: is is preventing transgender women from participating in women's sports.
3:24
Speaker 4: And we're also seeing just a focus on opposing DEI
3:28
Speaker 4: and that's obviously an issue that we've seen kind of
3:30
Speaker 4: throughout the new Trump administration. Diversity equity and inclusion efforts
3:34
Speaker 4: that we might see in universities or elsewhere.
3:36
Speaker 2: Like the Housing and Civil Enforcement section, What did they
3:40
Speaker 2: do and what are they now going to do?
3:42
Speaker 4: So Housing and Civil Enforcement primarily would take on the
3:45
Speaker 4: Fair Housing Act, which is a civil rights statue that
3:48
Speaker 4: prevents discrimination and housing. So, for example, refusing to rent
3:51
Speaker 4: an apartment to somebody because of their race would be
3:54
Speaker 4: a classic example of housing discrimination that they would go after.
3:57
Speaker 4: What we saw in the new Mission statement was actually
3:59
Speaker 4: no made of the Fairhousing Act, and I think that
4:01
Speaker 4: was something that was significant for people following was that
4:04
Speaker 4: landmark civil rights law in housing is not even mentioned
4:07
Speaker 4: as a priority, and it's misinstatement. And said, I think
4:10
Speaker 4: what we're going to see a lot of from this
4:11
Speaker 4: section is religious land use issues, so churches who want
4:15
Speaker 4: to get a permit or something for a certain amount
4:17
Speaker 4: of land and that they're claiming that they're being discriminated against,
4:20
Speaker 4: which has always been a mission of that section, to
4:22
Speaker 4: be clear, But I think we're going to see more
4:24
Speaker 4: of a focus on religious institutions in helping discrimination really,
4:28
Speaker 4: particularly probably Christian institutions, since anti Christian bias is actually
4:32
Speaker 4: another tenant that we've seen kind of throughout the different
4:35
Speaker 4: sections as a core mission for this division.
4:37
Speaker 2: But the division has always handled cases involving anti Christian bias.
4:43
Speaker 4: Anti Christian bias with any religious bias has always been
4:46
Speaker 4: within the mandate of Civil Rights Division, and absolutely in
4:49
Speaker 4: instances of anti Christian bias in the past, we would
4:51
Speaker 4: have seen prior administrations take those on. What I heard
4:54
Speaker 4: from a lot of former Justice Department officials who came
4:56
Speaker 4: from this division was that the New Times administration was
5:00
Speaker 4: somewhat of an outcome oriented approach when it comes to
5:03
Speaker 4: these issues. So I spoke to one former division official
5:06
Speaker 4: who told me that when they wanted to take a
5:08
Speaker 4: look at religious discrimination issues, they didn't start with a religion.
5:11
Speaker 4: They went around the country and talk to different communities
5:13
Speaker 4: to try to learn which religions they felt had been
5:16
Speaker 4: most affected at the time. This was during the Obama administration.
5:19
Speaker 4: He said. The research said them that Islamophobia was actually
5:22
Speaker 4: one of the most significant religious discrimination issues at that time.
5:25
Speaker 4: And so I've been Anti Christian Bias task Force for example,
5:28
Speaker 4: it was something that had happened recently. It shows that
5:30
Speaker 4: they're really interested in probing anti Christian bias, but it
5:34
Speaker 4: doesn't necessarily say that that is the most prevalent iss
5:38
Speaker 4: you have religious discrimination. So of course you know, I
5:40
Speaker 4: haven't done this market research as a reporter, I could
5:42
Speaker 4: not tell you, you know, exactly why that anti Christian bias
5:46
Speaker 4: stacks up against other religions. People can maybe take a
5:48
Speaker 4: guest to face on their own communities that which they're
5:50
Speaker 4: seeing the most of. But I just think it sort
5:52
Speaker 4: of says something that they're starting with that I'm starting
5:55
Speaker 4: with anti Christians as opposed to, you know, maybe taking
5:57
Speaker 4: a broader look and seeing where were the problems are.
6:00
Speaker 4: And I think that's some criticism that former Justice Department
6:03
Speaker 4: officials have had as they take a look at this,
6:04
Speaker 4: that perhaps they're going in with an ideology that they're
6:08
Speaker 4: wanting to play out as opposed to going in with
6:11
Speaker 4: a problem and seeing where it is.
6:12
Speaker 2: There's also the Educational Opportunities Section, which used to ensure
6:18
Speaker 2: that educational facilities are not discriminating against minorities.
6:21
Speaker 5: What is its mission now?
6:24
Speaker 4: So a huge part of what I think the new
6:26
Speaker 4: mission will be on the Educational Opportunity section is going
6:30
Speaker 4: to be a lot of transgender athletes and sports, and
6:33
Speaker 4: anti semitism on college campuses. These are issues for the
6:36
Speaker 4: Trump administration. More broadly, we've seen the Department of Education
6:39
Speaker 4: initiating investigations or sending letters to universities regarding investigations into
6:44
Speaker 4: anti Semitism on college campuses. Justice Department has opened one
6:47
Speaker 4: into the University of California on this issue for example. Obviously,
6:50
Speaker 4: we've seen this crack down very broadly. I mean, the
6:53
Speaker 4: State's Department has revoked visas from students who were involved
6:56
Speaker 4: in protests against the Israel Homos war. And that's a
7:00
Speaker 4: broad priority for the administration, and I think it's really
7:03
Speaker 4: going to play out in this Educational Opportunities section of
7:06
Speaker 4: the Civil Rights Division when it comes to seeing it
7:09
Speaker 4: as a religious discrimination issue. And then of course the
7:11
Speaker 4: transgender issue I think will also be a big one
7:14
Speaker 4: for that division. With college sports, there's been a lot
7:17
Speaker 4: of pushback on the right on the idea of transgender
7:20
Speaker 4: women participating in women's sports is being unfair to non
7:24
Speaker 4: transgender women, and so I think that's an issue that
7:26
Speaker 4: we can expect this division and in the Education section
7:29
Speaker 4: to really be taking on.
7:31
Speaker 2: And then the Special Litigation Section, what did that do
7:35
Speaker 2: and what does it do now?
7:37
Speaker 4: So the Special Litigation Section does take on a lot.
7:40
Speaker 4: They have a fairly broad mandate. Some of the cases
7:42
Speaker 4: that we've seen them do in the past are police
7:44
Speaker 4: brutality cases, cases for people who are incarcerated. We've also
7:48
Speaker 4: seen them take on space SAX cases, which are free
7:50
Speaker 4: to have access to clinic entrances. And so this is
7:53
Speaker 4: for example, would be protesters blocking people from entering abortion
7:56
Speaker 4: clinics for example. We certainly are not going to expect
8:00
Speaker 4: to see a law of enforcement of Face Act on
8:03
Speaker 4: abortion protesters for life protesters outside of clinics. Specifically, in
8:06
Speaker 4: the new mission statements, they indicated that they do not
8:10
Speaker 4: want to see disparate treatment of pro life protesters, prayer
8:13
Speaker 4: visuals outside of abortion clinics, et cetera. That's something we've
8:16
Speaker 4: heard the political appointee Harmet Dillon has ever seen the division.
8:19
Speaker 4: That's something we've heard her say. So I think that's
8:21
Speaker 4: something we're going to see a lot less of. One
8:23
Speaker 4: investigation that we've seen from the special Litigation section that's
8:26
Speaker 4: very new, I'm told for this division is actually one
8:28
Speaker 4: into gun rights. We've seen that section take on the
8:31
Speaker 4: Los Angeles Sheriff's Department on processing delays with concealed carry
8:35
Speaker 4: permits and whether that's an issue of discrimination. And so,
8:39
Speaker 4: while you know this is still within the broad mission
8:41
Speaker 4: of the Special Litigation Section. We haven't really seen civil
8:44
Speaker 4: rights be used for gun rights. So that's just kind
8:48
Speaker 4: of a new, I guess interpretation of the dissection's mandate,
8:52
Speaker 4: but also part of the Trump administration's broader mission. Like
8:55
Speaker 4: they've made clear that Second Amendment right to bear arms
8:59
Speaker 4: is an important one for them.
9:00
Speaker 2: So, I mean, you have the Civil Rights Division litigating
9:04
Speaker 2: basically against transgender women, litigating about delays in processing gun permits.
9:11
Speaker 2: One employee you talked, you said, they're demolishing the Civil
9:13
Speaker 2: Rights Division and repurposing it for something it's not meant
9:17
Speaker 2: to do. Are they basically abandoning almost everything the Civil
9:22
Speaker 2: Rights Division was known for, like you know, police brutality
9:27
Speaker 2: cases or discrimination against minorities. It seems like it's just
9:33
Speaker 2: a totally different focus.
9:36
Speaker 4: It does appear though, that may be the direction that's going.
9:38
Speaker 4: I think racial discrimination cases in particular, it seem like
9:41
Speaker 4: they're going to be deprioritized as something I'm really hearing
9:44
Speaker 4: across the board, and we've seen it in action. We've
9:46
Speaker 4: seen them withdraw settlements in racial discrimination cases. One of
9:50
Speaker 4: the first things that we saw this division do a
9:52
Speaker 4: few months ago was to withdraw settlements in racial discrimination
9:55
Speaker 4: cases against police departments regarding incidents past, and so I
9:59
Speaker 4: think sure that racial discrimination is going to be a
10:01
Speaker 4: lower priority for this division, and we're going to see
10:05
Speaker 4: more focus on the issues that we talked about on
10:07
Speaker 4: anti Semitism, anti transgender and I DEI. And yes, that
10:11
Speaker 4: is a radical departure, I'm told from what that division
10:14
Speaker 4: has been doing in the past. And so what we're
10:16
Speaker 4: seeing out of that is just like widespread exodus of
10:20
Speaker 4: career officials who have devoted their lives and careers to
10:23
Speaker 4: civil rights enforcement, who just really don't see the current
10:26
Speaker 4: mission as in line with their values and how they
10:28
Speaker 4: see civil rights enforcement and how it should be.
10:31
Speaker 2: And how many division attorneys have said they're leaving.
10:34
Speaker 4: We're still waiting on those exact final numbers. Employees had
10:37
Speaker 4: until April twenty eighth to let the division leaders know
10:40
Speaker 4: if they wanted to take the differred resignation offers. This
10:44
Speaker 4: was the second offer, second opportunity they had to take
10:46
Speaker 4: somewhat of a buyout where they could go on leave
10:48
Speaker 4: for a few months and then formally separate in the fall.
10:51
Speaker 4: So we're still remains to be seen on exactly the
10:53
Speaker 4: damage that's going to be done. But Harmie Dillon went
10:56
Speaker 4: on a podcast over the weekend and said she expected
10:59
Speaker 4: over a hundred attorneys out of that three hundred something
11:02
Speaker 4: attorney section to leave, which is significant, And obviously you
11:06
Speaker 4: know there's still a couple of days for people to
11:08
Speaker 4: get those requests in. Maybe not all have been approved.
11:10
Speaker 4: I think it's very possible, maybe even likely from what
11:13
Speaker 4: I'm hearing that it may be well over one hundred employees.
11:16
Speaker 4: I think half is absolutely within the realm of possibility.
11:19
Speaker 2: Are these career attorneys resigning themselves or are they being
11:23
Speaker 2: pushed out?
11:24
Speaker 4: It's a mix. We saw a flu of reassignments, quite
11:28
Speaker 4: a few section chiefs, section deputy chiefs of the various
11:31
Speaker 4: section we've talked about who were reassigned to complaint education
11:35
Speaker 4: or FOYA offices, which we're seen as a lower tier
11:38
Speaker 4: of work. I think for a lot of those people,
11:41
Speaker 4: and that certainly with an effort to push them out
11:43
Speaker 4: by reassigning them to something different that they didn't sign
11:45
Speaker 4: up to do. I think a lot of these people
11:47
Speaker 4: are going to see the writing on the wall and
11:48
Speaker 4: take the deferred resignation offer. And some of those people
11:51
Speaker 4: who take the deferred resignation, weren't reassigned. They just maybe
11:54
Speaker 4: see what the division is doing and it's not what
11:56
Speaker 4: they want to be doing, so they've decided best to
11:58
Speaker 4: go take the out now. So it's sort of a mix,
12:01
Speaker 4: and we've seen that across the board of the Justice Department.
12:03
Speaker 4: That will see some leaders be given a reassignment that's
12:06
Speaker 4: maybe seen as less appealing. And when sometimes I think
12:09
Speaker 4: when somebody's boss or longtime manager is reassigned or decides
12:13
Speaker 4: to leave, they can create a morale issue below them,
12:16
Speaker 4: and a lot of the people who maybe work under
12:18
Speaker 4: them and have really respected their work might fee less
12:20
Speaker 4: inclined to stay.
12:21
Speaker 2: I found your story really eye opening, Suzanne, thanks so
12:24
Speaker 2: much for joining me tonight. That's Bloomberg Law reporter Suzanne Monnac.
12:29
Speaker 2: The American legal system is being tested during President Donald
12:33
Speaker 2: Trump's first one hundred days in office and unprecedented blits
12:38
Speaker 2: of lawsuits filed against the administration's policies more than two
12:43
Speaker 2: hundred lawsuits in courts across the country over just about
12:47
Speaker 2: every aspect of his agenda, from spending to immigration to
12:52
Speaker 2: firing of federal workers and government officials. Trump has complained
12:57
Speaker 2: about the judges who are keeping him from carrying out
13:00
Speaker 2: his agenda. Here in an interview with ABC News yesterday,
13:05
Speaker 2: we have to be treated fairly by judges, and we're
13:08
Speaker 2: not being treated fairly by all judges. Critics say the
13:11
Speaker 2: Trump administration has not been following all court orders, and
13:16
Speaker 2: a Supreme Court showdown over the president's powers appears inevitable.
13:21
Speaker 2: Joining me is Dave Ehrenberg, former Palm Beach County state attorney.
13:26
Speaker 5: Dave Trump is.
13:27
Speaker 2: Averaging about two lawsuits filed against his administration for every
13:32
Speaker 2: day he's been in office. That's unprecedented.
13:37
Speaker 6: This is because President Trump has decided to govern by
13:41
Speaker 6: executive order as opposed to do the normal thing of
13:45
Speaker 6: going to Congress and getting your agenda adopted. So for
13:48
Speaker 6: people who think he's acting like a king, perhaps, but
13:52
Speaker 6: I think it's a sign of weakness that he can't
13:55
Speaker 6: act like a president and get your agenda through the
13:58
Speaker 6: legislative branch. FDR did. And the reason why Trump is
14:03
Speaker 6: doing this is because he's got a razor thin majority
14:06
Speaker 6: of Republicans in the House, knowing that it would be
14:09
Speaker 6: really difficult to pass on this very controversial legislation through
14:13
Speaker 6: and the filibuster in the Senate would block his legislation
14:16
Speaker 6: as well, So he is trying to go over the
14:19
Speaker 6: heads of Congress, and he's being assisted by the fact
14:21
Speaker 6: that Congress has advocated its role as a separate, coequal
14:25
Speaker 6: branch of government. So it's up to the judiciary to
14:27
Speaker 6: stand firm and to provide the checks and balances that
14:31
Speaker 6: a democracy requires, and so far they have, they have
14:34
Speaker 6: provided the guardrails. So that's why you're seeing so many lawsuits.
14:37
Speaker 6: That's why you're seeing so many laws in court for Trump.
14:40
Speaker 6: That would change if he decided to govern through legislation
14:43
Speaker 6: rather than executive order, but there's no sign he's going
14:46
Speaker 6: to stop.
14:46
Speaker 2: There are cases in all different areas. There is you know,
14:49
Speaker 2: government spending and DEI policies and all kinds of things.
14:53
Speaker 2: The cases that have gotten the most attention are the
14:57
Speaker 2: immigration cases.
14:59
Speaker 5: Why do you think there is so many cases in
15:00
Speaker 5: that area?
15:01
Speaker 2: I mean, is it because they're testing how far they can.
15:05
Speaker 6: Go to his top priority? So immigration is the most
15:08
Speaker 6: important issue for him, and he knows that's the reason
15:11
Speaker 6: why he got elected. So he got elected for two reasons.
15:15
Speaker 6: Inflation in the southern border, immigration, and so far he
15:20
Speaker 6: has not been able to lower prices because the president
15:23
Speaker 6: has very little to do with inflation, although his positive
15:25
Speaker 6: caused increase in prices through tariffs. So he's relying instead
15:29
Speaker 6: on the southern border and immigration, and so he's been
15:31
Speaker 6: extra aggressive on that issue because that's his bread and butter.
15:35
Speaker 6: But in so doing he is running a foul of
15:39
Speaker 6: due process because the president is not a king. And
15:43
Speaker 6: even though this obscure Alien Enemies Act from the eighteenth
15:47
Speaker 6: century exists, it is rarely invoked, and when it is invoked,
15:52
Speaker 6: it doesn't give the present unilateral authority to deport anyone
15:55
Speaker 6: without due process. And the courts are reminding him of that. Now, Trump,
16:00
Speaker 6: instead of just abiding by court rulings, is trying to
16:03
Speaker 6: evade them. Importantly, he has not said that he has
16:06
Speaker 6: openly defined court rulings, and I think that's important. That's
16:09
Speaker 6: why I don't believe we're in a constitutional crisis. Yet
16:11
Speaker 6: the day that he says I'm going to defy the
16:14
Speaker 6: court's rulings, that's when it's coo, that's when we have
16:19
Speaker 6: a constitutional crisis. But that day hasn't come yet. He's
16:22
Speaker 6: paying lip service to it. He's saying he's abiding by
16:24
Speaker 6: court rulings even though he's playing games with him. But
16:26
Speaker 6: still the fact that he is saying he respects the
16:29
Speaker 6: Supreme Court and will abide by the rulings does mean something.
16:32
Speaker 2: Yeah, and Trump did say that he follows the laws
16:35
Speaker 2: again today in the Oval Office when he was asked
16:38
Speaker 2: about the case of the marilynd Man Kilmar Arbrego Garcia,
16:43
Speaker 2: who was mistakenly deported to l Salvador.
16:46
Speaker 5: I don't know.
16:47
Speaker 6: I haven't spoken to him.
16:48
Speaker 2: I really leave that to the lawyers, and I take
16:50
Speaker 2: my advice from Pam and everybody that has very much involved.
16:54
Speaker 2: They know the laws, and we followed the laws exactly.
16:57
Speaker 2: One of the first judges that Trump has all doubt
17:00
Speaker 2: is the chief judge in the DC Courts, Judge James Boseburg,
17:05
Speaker 2: and he's the one that oversaw that high profile challenge
17:09
Speaker 2: to the deportation flights of Venezuelans to El Salvador. Trump
17:13
Speaker 2: has called him highly conflicted, a troublemaker and agitator, a
17:17
Speaker 2: grand standard, and even a radical left lunatic. He's used
17:21
Speaker 2: some of those similar names against judges who were in
17:26
Speaker 2: charge of the cases. The criminal case is against him.
17:29
Speaker 2: What does it do to have though the President calling
17:33
Speaker 2: judges a radical left lunatic and calling for their impeachment.
17:38
Speaker 6: Well, it got the admonition from Chief Justice Roberts. Chief
17:42
Speaker 6: Office Roberts rarely speaks out on stuff like this, but
17:44
Speaker 6: he did saying that if you disagree with the judges ruling,
17:49
Speaker 6: the recourse is not to try to impeace the judge,
17:53
Speaker 6: and by implication, not to bass the judge, but to
17:55
Speaker 6: appeal the judge. And that meant something because because Trump
18:01
Speaker 6: knows that his bread is buttered by the Supreme Court,
18:04
Speaker 6: that's who gave him unprecedented immunity. That's a big reason
18:08
Speaker 6: why he was elected. He was able to avoid criminal
18:11
Speaker 6: trial during the campaign, So he owes the Supreme Court
18:15
Speaker 6: a lot, and that's why he didn't push back when
18:16
Speaker 6: Chief Justice Roberts scolded him. So, although it is a
18:21
Speaker 6: very maga thing to bash judges, you haven't seen it
18:25
Speaker 6: as vitriolic as it seemed to go. Right now, it
18:30
Speaker 6: seems like the rhetoric has died off a little bit,
18:33
Speaker 6: and I think that's because Chief Justice Roberts had to
18:37
Speaker 6: step in and remind Trump that he is out of line.
18:41
Speaker 6: And Trump, who's purely transactional, does not want to upset
18:45
Speaker 6: the Chief Justice of the most important court in the land.
18:48
Speaker 2: So Judge Bosberg, actually two judges are investigating whether the
18:53
Speaker 2: Trump administration defied their orders. As you say, Trump repeatedly
18:57
Speaker 2: says he always obeys court orders.
19:00
Speaker 5: But when the government.
19:02
Speaker 2: Flew those Venezuelans to El Salvador, Judge Boseburg paused the
19:08
Speaker 2: deportations and told the government to turn the planes around.
19:12
Speaker 2: He ruled on April sixteenth that the government demonstrated a
19:16
Speaker 2: willful disregard for his order for not turning the flights
19:20
Speaker 2: or ordering their return from l Salvador, and that none
19:23
Speaker 2: of their responses have been satisfactory. So Judge Bosburg could
19:27
Speaker 2: be on the way to finding someone in the Trump
19:31
Speaker 2: administration in contempt.
19:33
Speaker 6: Could be. So far, no one has been found in
19:35
Speaker 6: the content. But what has happened is that the US
19:38
Speaker 6: Supreme Court, in extraordinary ruling on a Saturday at one am,
19:43
Speaker 6: came in and put the kebash on Trump's deportations of
19:47
Speaker 6: Venezuelans to El Salvador. And that was even though the
19:50
Speaker 6: case really hadn't come to the Supreme Court, and the
19:52
Speaker 6: Supreme Court stepped in without really clear jurisdiction, even though
19:56
Speaker 6: the appellate court, the lower Court, the Circuit had not
19:58
Speaker 6: even ruled, So that to me showed that the Supreme
20:02
Speaker 6: Court isn't messing around, that they actually believed that Trump
20:06
Speaker 6: was going to violate Bozburg's order, that Trump was dumbing
20:09
Speaker 6: his nose at the judiciary, and so they had to
20:11
Speaker 6: step in. And so Trump is at risk of losing
20:15
Speaker 6: the Supreme Court he needs so badly because he's Tustas
20:18
Speaker 6: Roberts and amy Cony Barrett are the two most important justices,
20:21
Speaker 6: and in that Saturday one am ruling, it was not
20:25
Speaker 6: only they who ruled to halt the deportations, but also
20:29
Speaker 6: Kavanaugh and Corse. It so all three justices appointed by
20:33
Speaker 6: Trump ruled against the Trump administration. And so that's why
20:37
Speaker 6: it's more than just holding Trump in contempt in his
20:40
Speaker 6: administration and contempt. It's also actions like we saw at
20:44
Speaker 6: one am on Saturday by the Supreme Court that shows
20:46
Speaker 6: that the courts are pushing back.
20:48
Speaker 2: Let's just say Judge Bozburg finds a Trump administration official
20:53
Speaker 2: in contempt, I mean, what would really happen? Couldn't Trump
20:57
Speaker 2: pardon anyone charged with contempt?
21:00
Speaker 6: Yes, criminal contempt. Trump could step in, but he can
21:04
Speaker 6: also just disregard the court's order. I mean, the court's
21:07
Speaker 6: orders are enforced by the Martial Service, and the martial
21:11
Speaker 6: Service is under the executive branch, and so be up
21:14
Speaker 6: to the Department of Justice to go along, and you
21:16
Speaker 6: have to believe that they won't. Now, there are some
21:20
Speaker 6: rare cases where the court could appoint like a local
21:23
Speaker 6: sheriff to round someone up, but I think that's not
21:26
Speaker 6: going to happen. Could Trump step in and mess around
21:30
Speaker 6: with it, Yes, that's a federal crime. He could pardon someone.
21:34
Speaker 6: But really the big stick that the court holds is
21:37
Speaker 6: really in the court of public opinion. The public overwhelming
21:41
Speaker 6: opposes disobeying court rulings. They don't want to see the
21:45
Speaker 6: executive branch disobeying the court ruling. And now we'll hurt
21:47
Speaker 6: Trump in the court of public opinion. Plus, as I mentioned,
21:51
Speaker 6: the Supreme Court could come in and just say no,
21:54
Speaker 6: no more, We're going to stop all your deportations for now.
21:57
Speaker 6: Even if we don't have jurisdiction, we're going to step in.
21:59
Speaker 6: So that's a punishment itself. Now if we go down
22:01
Speaker 6: further and say, well, what if Trump just says that
22:04
Speaker 6: now we're going to defy the Supreme Court, Well, that's
22:06
Speaker 6: the conserttional crisis, that's the coup, and I don't think
22:08
Speaker 6: the public would tolerate that.
22:10
Speaker 2: Yes, an overwhelming majority of Americans believe the Trump administration
22:15
Speaker 2: should follow court orders. According to a poll from Pew
22:19
Speaker 2: Research that came out last week. Most Americans seventy eight
22:23
Speaker 2: percent say the Trump administration has to follow lower court orders,
22:28
Speaker 2: and eighty eight percent say the administration has to follow
22:32
Speaker 2: Supreme Court rulings.
22:35
Speaker 5: And Dave, what do you.
22:36
Speaker 2: Think about the Attorney General Pam Bondi making frequent appearances
22:41
Speaker 2: on Fox criticizing court orders and judges. I've never seen
22:47
Speaker 2: an AG behave like that, you know, I have.
22:49
Speaker 6: Been surprised at the dialogue coming from DOJ. I've never
22:53
Speaker 6: seen an attorney general on the cable news shows like that.
22:56
Speaker 6: But there's nothing that says you can't. This is the
22:58
Speaker 6: Trump administration norms. So although we've never seen it before,
23:02
Speaker 6: there's nothing illegal about it. It's just something that we're
23:06
Speaker 6: not used to. And even though I know her very well,
23:09
Speaker 6: she and I have different political views, and I always
23:12
Speaker 6: knew I'd be disagreeing with a lot of the things
23:14
Speaker 6: that she was going to do. But as far as
23:17
Speaker 6: whether this is just wrong for her to go on
23:20
Speaker 6: to me. Now, no, I mean, she's taken a very
23:22
Speaker 6: transparent way to talk about things in front of millions
23:26
Speaker 6: of people, But the dialogue that comes out of it
23:29
Speaker 6: is very partisan. It's very pro Trump. But the voters
23:32
Speaker 6: chose a Trump loyalist who be attorney general when they
23:35
Speaker 6: voted for Trump. The other alternative was Kamala Harris, who
23:39
Speaker 6: ran on in part the independence of the attorney general
23:43
Speaker 6: and the independence of the judiciary, and she lost. And
23:46
Speaker 6: so elections have consequences, and that's the reason why we
23:50
Speaker 6: shouldn't be too surprised to see Trump's attorney general on
23:53
Speaker 6: Fox News and serving essentially as the president's lawyer. He
23:57
Speaker 6: campaigned on that. He said he wanted that I could
24:00
Speaker 6: have been a lot worse. You could have had Matt Gates,
24:02
Speaker 6: who I believe would have locked up Donald Trump's political
24:05
Speaker 6: enemies for political purposes.
24:07
Speaker 2: Talk about stress on the system. Coming up next, the
24:10
Speaker 2: deportation case that won't go away. This is bloomberg. One
24:15
Speaker 2: legal battle against the Trump administration seems to have eclipsed
24:19
Speaker 2: the others. The wrongful deportation of kilmore Arbrigo Garcia to
24:24
Speaker 2: l Salvador. The Trump administration has said in the past
24:28
Speaker 2: that they have no power or plans to bring Garcia back,
24:32
Speaker 2: but according to several reports, Secretary of State Marco Rubio
24:36
Speaker 2: has been in touch with l Salvador's president about Garcia. However,
24:41
Speaker 2: during a cabinet meeting today, Rubio refused to discuss whether
24:45
Speaker 2: there's been any such contact.
24:47
Speaker 1: Well, I will never tell you that, and you know
24:48
Speaker 1: who also, I'll never tell any judge because the conduct
24:51
Speaker 1: of our foreign policy belongs to the President of the
24:53
Speaker 1: United States and the executive branch, not some judge. So
24:55
Speaker 1: we will conduct foreign policy appropriately if we need to.
24:59
Speaker 5: But I'll never.
25:00
Speaker 1: Discussing, and no one will over her to make us discussing.
25:02
Speaker 1: That's how foreign policy works.
25:04
Speaker 2: I've been talking to Dave Ehrenberg, former Palm Beach County
25:07
Speaker 2: State Attorney. Dave.
25:08
Speaker 5: The judge had.
25:09
Speaker 2: A demand for the government to share evidence about Garcia.
25:13
Speaker 2: She put that off until April thirtieth because it seems
25:17
Speaker 2: like the government may be coming around on that.
25:21
Speaker 6: So that case is still muddled because you have the
25:26
Speaker 6: US President and the Secretary of State and the Attorney
25:29
Speaker 6: General saying that it's out of our hands. It's up
25:32
Speaker 6: to the president ofl Salvador. But it's clear that if
25:35
Speaker 6: Trump wanted a Bregio Garcia back, he would be on
25:38
Speaker 6: the next plane back in first class if that was
25:41
Speaker 6: their request. After all, the Trump administration in the United
25:44
Speaker 6: States government is paying for his incarceration. We're paying for
25:49
Speaker 6: El Salvador keeping these individuals behind bars. And Christy Nome,
25:54
Speaker 6: the Secretary of Department of Homeland Security, said that El
25:57
Speaker 6: Salvador's prison is a in our toolbox. Well, if it's
26:01
Speaker 6: one of our tools, you can use those tools and
26:04
Speaker 6: you can use it to fix things. So I think
26:07
Speaker 6: ultimately the courts are going to have to get a
26:09
Speaker 6: little more specific about pushing the United States government to
26:13
Speaker 6: get Abrego Garcia back. The Supreme Court softened the language
26:18
Speaker 6: of the district court and said, instead of effectuating his return,
26:22
Speaker 6: they need to facilitate it. Facilitate is not as strong
26:24
Speaker 6: of a word as effectuating it. So the Supreme Court
26:26
Speaker 6: tried to get everyone together unanimously, which it did nine
26:29
Speaker 6: zero ruling saying kumbaya and say, okay, can we all
26:33
Speaker 6: at least live with the facilitating language. But that relies
26:36
Speaker 6: on the good faith of the Trump ministration. So when
26:37
Speaker 6: the Trump administration says, yeah, facilitate means we'll send a
26:40
Speaker 6: plane if the presidentl Salvador deports him, and he's not
26:45
Speaker 6: going to do so, so what are we going to do?
26:47
Speaker 6: That's not good enough for the Supreme Court. That is
26:49
Speaker 6: a reason I believe the Supreme Court stepped in in
26:52
Speaker 6: this extraordinary Saturday one am ruling. This was their way
26:55
Speaker 6: to say, we don't trust you anymore. So the ball
26:58
Speaker 6: is going to be in the trumpdministration's court, and Judge
27:02
Speaker 6: Zinnis is also getting impatient.
27:05
Speaker 2: Trump has already filed eleven emergency requests with the Supreme Court,
27:10
Speaker 2: which is more than that during the combined sixteen years
27:13
Speaker 2: of George W. Bush and Barack Obama's administrations. And we're
27:17
Speaker 2: still waiting for the court to rule or decide whether
27:21
Speaker 2: to take a lot of those cases.
27:22
Speaker 6: So there's a lot going on in the shadow docket.
27:24
Speaker 6: So we'll see. I mean, we've never been down this
27:26
Speaker 6: road before. We've never seen this kind of thing before,
27:28
Speaker 6: and so that's why I'm not surprised that the Supreme
27:30
Speaker 6: Court does things that we've never seen before.
27:32
Speaker 2: So now let's talk about the tariff situation and the
27:35
Speaker 2: Democratic Ags, A group of Democratic AGS are suing Trump
27:40
Speaker 2: over the tariff, saying they have upended the constitutional order
27:45
Speaker 2: and brought chaos to the American economy. There are several
27:48
Speaker 2: suits over the tariff. So why would the AGS bother
27:52
Speaker 2: to sue.
27:53
Speaker 6: Well, it's a coalition. You have Democratic ags and you
27:56
Speaker 6: have from the business community. They're suing because Trump, if
28:01
Speaker 6: he wants to impose tariffs, needs to go to Congress.
28:04
Speaker 6: But there is a law similar to the Alien Enemies Act.
28:06
Speaker 6: There's a law from the seventies that permits a president
28:11
Speaker 6: to put on emergency punishment emergency sanctions on governments that
28:16
Speaker 6: are rogue. But it does not say in that law
28:20
Speaker 6: that terriffs are a possibility. It's not a sanctioned listed
28:25
Speaker 6: in the list of sanctions in that law. So number one,
28:28
Speaker 6: the lawsuit says, even if you invoke this law in
28:31
Speaker 6: case of emergency, you can't use terrorists. That's not an
28:34
Speaker 6: arrow in your quiver according to the statue. And number two,
28:37
Speaker 6: is it really an emergency? Is it an emergency a
28:40
Speaker 6: crisis situation when you are trying to overturn decades of
28:44
Speaker 6: trade and balances. If you have a problem with the
28:46
Speaker 6: American policy or something has been going on for decades.
28:51
Speaker 6: That's not a crisis emergency. It's not like you have
28:54
Speaker 6: to have emergency powers. You have to go to Congress
28:56
Speaker 6: and change policy. So I think that these attorneys general
28:59
Speaker 6: have a very good argument. I think that their lawsuit
29:03
Speaker 6: will prevail, at least in part, to slow down these tariffs.
29:07
Speaker 6: Trump will have to go to Congress if he wants
29:08
Speaker 6: to get them through, but Congress doesn't want them. They
29:11
Speaker 6: see how damaging these things are. Maybe one day we'll
29:13
Speaker 6: have a Congress that actually works, that actually doesn't just
29:16
Speaker 6: emasculate itself. But for now, the Congress is just scared
29:20
Speaker 6: to do anything. But that day could change once prices
29:23
Speaker 6: go way up and Trump's poll numbers go way down.
29:26
Speaker 2: They're arguing that this is effectively massive taxes on Americans.
29:32
Speaker 6: It definitely is. I mean, these tariffs are not paid
29:35
Speaker 6: by foreign governments. They're paid by the importers, and the
29:37
Speaker 6: importers pass it along to the consumers. And you saw
29:42
Speaker 6: how Amazon wanted its consumers, its customers to know why
29:47
Speaker 6: all of a sudden prices are going up, and they
29:49
Speaker 6: were going to list it as here is the cost
29:51
Speaker 6: of tariffs. And then Trump called Jeff Bezos and say,
29:54
Speaker 6: how dare you? And then Jeff Bezos did what a
29:57
Speaker 6: lot of billionaires and big law firms have been doing lately,
29:59
Speaker 6: and and so they will not report the specific itemized
30:04
Speaker 6: tariff costs. But the public is not stupid when their
30:07
Speaker 6: goods go up. There's only so much blame you can
30:10
Speaker 6: give to Joe Biden and DEI and all these other things.
30:13
Speaker 6: At some point people are gonna put two and two
30:15
Speaker 6: together and know that it's because of terror policy. Why
30:18
Speaker 6: all of a sudden the stuff that they need that's
30:21
Speaker 6: being imported from other countries is now much more expensive.
30:24
Speaker 2: A White House spokesman said the Democrats are prioritizing a
30:28
Speaker 2: witch hunt against President Trump over protecting the safety and
30:32
Speaker 2: well being of their constituents. But any lawsuit could take
30:37
Speaker 2: months or even years, and it would come likely after
30:42
Speaker 2: the ninety day pause.
30:43
Speaker 6: Courts could act more quickly. Think it is a strategy,
30:46
Speaker 6: as you know, for Trump and Maggot, to delay, delay, delay,
30:49
Speaker 6: But I think the courts are onto them. They've been
30:52
Speaker 6: through this before.
30:53
Speaker 2: So you're in Florida, let's talk about your governor Ron DeSantis,
30:57
Speaker 2: who's term limited and he's promoted his wife to be
31:01
Speaker 2: the next governor, and that.
31:03
Speaker 6: Is setting up a showdown between the DeSantis wing of
31:05
Speaker 6: the party in Florida and the Trump wing of the
31:07
Speaker 6: party because Trump has endorsed Byron Donald's, a mega congressman,
31:11
Speaker 6: to be the next governor. And that's why the knives
31:14
Speaker 6: are out for Casey DeSantis. She has a charity, the
31:17
Speaker 6: Hope Foundation of Florida, that allegedly received a ten million
31:21
Speaker 6: dollar donation from Senteen, a medicaid provider, a vendor who
31:29
Speaker 6: overcharged the state and so as part of their penalty,
31:31
Speaker 6: they had to pay a certain amount to the state
31:34
Speaker 6: and ten million dollars of that went to Hope Foundation,
31:37
Speaker 6: and then a ten million dollar donation went from the
31:41
Speaker 6: Hope Foundation to tax controlled by DeSantis's people to run
31:48
Speaker 6: ads against the marijuana referendum that was on the ballot,
31:53
Speaker 6: and the marijuana referendum lost in a close election. And
31:57
Speaker 6: people are saying, well, it is not illegal to take
31:59
Speaker 6: money was meant for the state's medicaid program and put
32:03
Speaker 6: it into your own political coffers. The DeSantis folks are
32:07
Speaker 6: saying that was extra money, that was an extra contribution
32:10
Speaker 6: that was not part of the medicaid penalty. And the
32:14
Speaker 6: Republicans are doing a lot of the investigation here. He
32:17
Speaker 6: may be wondering, why are the Republicans investigating this? Because
32:21
Speaker 6: Ron DeSantis is a lame duck. His term ends in
32:25
Speaker 6: twenty twenty six, he can't run for governor again. There's
32:29
Speaker 6: not a lot of good feelings amongst Republicans towards the
32:34
Speaker 6: governor who has rules with an iron fist, and now
32:36
Speaker 6: that he's a lame duck, they're getting some revenge and press.
32:39
Speaker 6: Most importantly, Donald Trump runs the Republican Party nationally and
32:44
Speaker 6: in Florida, and they want to please the Boss, so
32:48
Speaker 6: they're going to side with him and Byron. Donald's over Ron.
32:51
Speaker 6: In case of Dystantus, this whole controversy was not generated
32:55
Speaker 6: by Democrats. There aren't enough democrats in Tallahassee in our
32:58
Speaker 6: government to make us think about things. And it was
33:02
Speaker 6: not caused by the press corps. The press corps has
33:05
Speaker 6: been decimated in Tallahassee. This was created by fellow Republicans
33:09
Speaker 6: and that's why DeSantis keeps looking over his shoulder to
33:12
Speaker 6: see who's gonna stab in the back next.
33:16
Speaker 5: Is he still popular among Floridians?
33:19
Speaker 6: Yeah, I think he would get re elected to a
33:21
Speaker 6: third term if he ran. I do think so. I
33:22
Speaker 6: think he's not as popular as he was, but I think,
33:26
Speaker 6: you know, Florida's a red state, and I think he
33:30
Speaker 6: is still somewhat popular. But Donald Trump is more popular,
33:34
Speaker 6: and Donald Trump's choice would normally beat Rond De Santa's
33:39
Speaker 6: choice in a party primary. And when you add this
33:42
Speaker 6: growing scandal which has damaged Casey DeSantis and Ron De Santis,
33:48
Speaker 6: then I think the chances of Casey de Satan's becoming
33:52
Speaker 6: governor are getting smaller by the day. She has not
33:54
Speaker 6: announced that she's running for governor yet, but she's trying
33:57
Speaker 6: to get through this controversy, which really had caught them
33:59
Speaker 6: flat foot. I don't think they expected this. They had
34:01
Speaker 6: never dealt with anything like this in their entire time
34:04
Speaker 6: in office. They didn't care what the Democrats said, they
34:07
Speaker 6: didn't care what the press said. But this is different.
34:09
Speaker 6: This is coming from their side of the aisle. So
34:12
Speaker 6: he's calling out Republicans for being Rhinos, he's calling them
34:14
Speaker 6: out to being fake Republicans. He can't believe what's happening
34:18
Speaker 6: to him, but it's just reality of politics. If there's
34:21
Speaker 6: blood in the water, the people who who really resented
34:24
Speaker 6: you for years they're going to come out and exploit
34:27
Speaker 6: that situation. They see it, they see that blood in
34:30
Speaker 6: the water, and all of a sudden, they're coming out
34:32
Speaker 6: of the woodwork to go fishing. I think that's a
34:35
Speaker 6: consistent metaphor, but leave it up to the listeners.
34:39
Speaker 2: Always interesting to talk to you, Dave, Thanks so much.
34:42
Speaker 2: That's Dave Ehrenberg, former Palm Beach County State Attorney. And
34:45
Speaker 2: that's it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show.
34:48
Speaker 2: Remember you can always get the latest legal news on
34:50
Speaker 2: our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,
34:55
Speaker 2: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, Slash Law,
35:00
Speaker 2: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every
35:03
Speaker 2: week night at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June
35:06
Speaker 2: Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg