14 Burst results for "Tara Lee Grove"
Bloomberg Radio New York - Recording Feed
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York - Recording Feed
"Going to end race based affirmative action at universities. That's Tara Lee grove, a Professor of law of the University of Texas in Austin. Speaking to David west on Bloomberg's balance of power, you can catch that program weekdays at 12 p.m. Wall Street time right here on Bloomberg radio and TV plus attorneys confined exceptional legal research and business development tools of Bloomberg law dot com and on the Bloomberg terminal at B log go. This is Bloomberg daybreak. Broadcasting 24 hours a day at Bloomberg dot com on the Bloomberg business app. And at Bloomberg quick take. This is Bloomberg radio. Live from a Bloomberg interactive burger studios is his Bloomberg day break for Wednesday, December 28th, 2022, coming up the shower. The CEO of Southwest Airlines apologizes as the carrier keeps canceling flights. The White House will comply with the Supreme Court decision to keep coronavirus border controls in place. And China's decision to abandon its COVID zero policy now has other countries considering restricting entry. Residents in Buffalo continued to dig out from the blizzard of the century plus new details from the January 6th panel on Rudy Giuliani. I'm Michael Barr, or ahead. John Stanton sports an amazing night for Luke and Johnson she led Dallas to an overtime win over the Knicks, the islanders won the rangers law. That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg daybreak. On Bloomberg 11 three zero new York, Bloomberg 99 one Washington D.C., Bloomberg one O 6 one Boston, Bloomberg 9 60 San Francisco, Syria's exam one 19 and around the world on Bloomberg radio dot com and via the Bloomberg business app. And good morning, I'm John Tucker. And I'm Karen Moscow, U.S. stock index futures are now on the rise
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"The last trading day a week of the year and to bring us up to speed on where we are so far in this week we welcome Bloomberg cross asset reporter Emily Griffiths. Emily, thanks for being here, really appreciate it. So where are we on stocks and bonds? At this point. So when we look at the S&P 500, we are bouncing off the lows of the day at one point about an hour ago we had crossed into positive territory, but we're now still negative and technology stocks are really underperforming today. We have the NASDAQ 100 down now over 1% Tesla leading the losses there as they reported that production cut in China and then you look at oil, higher, and that's leading to energy stocks outperforming in the S&P 500, the energy sector up about 1%. Dollar, now really unchanged and then those yields in the last hour have really moved up higher. We're now looking at the two year at about 4.4% up about 9 basis points. Which probably isn't helping tech stocks either. The yields go up, it doesn't have very good. At the same time, a lot of people were stranded by Southwest. Tell us what the airlines given the weather. Yeah, so southwest really selling off today we are down about 6% and it's interesting to look at how southwest is faring versus its competitors. So southwest said for Tuesday, about two thirds of its flights were canceled. And when you take a look at American JetBlue Delta and United, they said that no more than 2% of their flights were canceled. So a big difference there between Southwest and its competitors. I think that's why we're seeing southwest sell off so much. Some of the other airlines taking it on the chin too, but Southwest definitely the biggest underperformer here. Another big development right now is China loosening some of the restrictions on their zero COVID policy. Is that having effects on, for example, commodities? Yeah, I mean, we're seeing all metals higher copper up about 1.5% and oil again higher in those energy stocks, but the China reopening trade, it's tough for investors, especially when you look at the equity side, Chinese equities had such a big rebound in November, so a lot of my sources are now asking, what's already priced in, we did expect this reopening, how much more can medals and also stocks move up higher if this news has already been priced into the market? Thank you so much for being here. That is Bloomberg's cross asset reporter, Emily graffito, reporting on the markets. We're going to move from the markets now to the Supreme Court of the United States and what we have in store in the new year. We welcome Tara Lee grove. She's Professor of law at the University of Texas in Austin. So thank you so much for being with us. Professor. The Supreme Court has a lot on its docket. It's argued some of them already. Some of them are still yet to come. But some of them really do have to affect potentially the American business community. One of them that we're all watching is the so called affirmative action case. Take us through that. That has been argued as I understand it. It has been argued, yes. So there are two cases before the Supreme Court, one involving the state of North Carolina, and one involving Harvard. And this is important because whatever the Supreme Court does could affect both state universities and private universities. So the argument is essentially that affirmative action taking race into account in university admissions is unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That's the part that applies to state institutions. And is also invalid under title 6 of the Civil Rights Act. So title 6 is important because it applies to any institution that receives federal funds. And this is why this case could get rid of race based affirmative action for every academic institution in the country. Well, before we talk about the oral argument, if we gleaned anything from it, let me pursue what you just raised. What about the 1964 Civil Rights Act? I mean, if in fact they go that way and say that it's unconstitutional. And by the way, violates title 6, is it a very big step to say also it violates the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which would apply to essentially all corporations. It would not be a very big step. So if title 6 of the Civil Rights Act prevents private and public universities from taking race into account, then probably the same language or very similar language in title 7 of the Civil Rights Act, which implies applies to employment discrimination, would also prohibit all employers from taking race into account. I think it's not going to be immediate. This case is just about university admissions, but I think employment is the next shoe to drop. But it could have a truly profound effect on employers right through the country, potentially. Again, as you say, not immediately. What did we learn if anything from the oral argument? And I'm mindful of the fact you got to be very careful about reading too much into oral arguments. It is very hard from the oral argument to know from oral arguments in general to know for sure what the Supreme Court is going to do. I'd say going into the oral argument most professors of constitutional law thought the Supreme Court was going to overrule its past cases on affirmative action a case called greater versus bollinger. After the oral argument, I think most professors of constitutional law continue to believe that it is possible the Supreme Court would find some kind of compromise or say we're not going to immediately outlaw affirmative action. We'll give it a little more time. I don't think that's going to happen. I think the oral argument was confirmation that the Supreme Court is in all likelihood going to end race based affirmative action at universities. So let's turn to another case that is pending in the Supreme Court and it involves social media. And it's section two 30 of the communications act. And the
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Has come anywhere close to having 60 votes. So I think this is likely to all be litigated out, dealt with in the various states around the country through the democratic process. And with that, there's deep concern about the future of contraception and same sex relationships earlier today on Bloomberg, Tara Lee grove, a vision and ethics foundation says there could be many far reaching consequences. And so just to have a justice saying not only should we consider substantive due process, but listing those specific cases involving contraception and same sex marriage and intimacy among LGBTQ community is pretty extraordinary. She says those issues have to be tackled in California voters will decide in November whether to make abortion a right under the state constitution. In San Francisco, Ahmed Baxter, this is Bloomberg, Brian. All right, thanks very much. I had 39 minutes past the hour. Let's get to sports. Dan schwarzman is looking at a couple of upsets going down at Wimbledon Dan. Yeah, Brian let's start off in the men's draw on day one 7 sea duber catch loses in 5 sets done seated Alejandro davidovich for kina, a topsy Novak Djokovic did drop the second set to Korean soon luquan en route to Forsyth win now. There was another big scare 5th seed Carlos alcaraz comes from being down two sets to one and in a fourth set tiebreaker to knock off young lenard's crew in 5 sets while 16 C Pablo crane a booster retires from his opening match after two sets. Others advancing to the second round who third seed Casper Ruud 9 seat Cameron nori, sends you to the Yannick center in three Americans 20th C John Isner 23rd C to Frances tiafoe and 30th see Tommy Paul. And the women's drawn to see the net continent third seed owned jabur intensi de rata Khanna roll into the second round in straight sets while 7 seated American Danielle Collins is knocked out in three sets. ESPN reporting that the Los Angeles Lakers are the only team that is actively trying to acquire Brooklyn that scored Kyrie Irving in a sign and trade deal. Brooklyn has been unwilling to give the 30 year old a long-term contract extension with Irving having to Wednesday to decide to exercise his 36 and a half $1 million player option for next season. I'm Dan Schwartzman that your Bloomberg world sports update, Rashad. Thank you, Dan. We are looking of course that the Asian trading day would go in there in 20 minutes away from the session in Seoul and Tokyo getting on getting on board as it were. We got U.S. equities grinding a bit lower. We've got treasury yields and oil on the way up and all of these things could prove a bit of a headwind for Asia and also on top of that. There may
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Thank you so much, Rick. I want to continue on the story, Ritu, was just covering that is the Supreme Court. It's only days away now from the end of its term, brought down several opinions as Rick has said today. They weren't necessarily the ones who was waiting for, but that may be a lesson in and of itself. We turned out a law professor Tara Lee grove of the University of Texas in Austin, so professor, thanks so much for being with us. I do want to get to some of the big decisions strike me that the fact that there were these other decisions that seem a bit more technical or not so broad, not so socially minded. Actually illustrates a lot of the Supreme Court's work is not big decisions like the right to carry arms. It's not the right to abortion. It's not even the scope of the EPA. That's right. A good deal, but the Supreme Court does is what many people find boring legal and technical issues involving statutory interpretation, trying to figure out how to resolve conflicts among the lower courts on issues that tend not to make the front page of major newspapers. So I agree. And these decisions also can be unanimous or 8 to one or 7 to two. At the same time, I wonder if there were any surprises in here because there was one constitutional case of course involving free exercise under the First Amendment. And it looked like it was another step by the Supreme Court in the direction of really allowing a wider range in this case, parochial schools. Right. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution contains two provisions that are arguably somewhat intention. So it says that Congress shall make no law establishing respecting the establishment of a church. Respecting the establishment of religion and there's a provision of the First Amendment saying that Congress must respect the free exercise of religion. And for a long time, it's been hard to figure out how these two provisions go along. And for a long time, the Supreme Court said the establishment clause required states and localities and the federal government not to give money to religious activities. And the court seems to be stepping back from that interpretation of the establishment clause at the same time that the court is more broadly interpreting the free exercise clause to say that if the federal state or local government makes certain programs available to some folks, it needs to make it needs to make those programs available to religious folks as well. And the court has been doing this very gradually over a series of cases and the most recent case came today in a program out of Maine. So professor, we do have at least a couple of big decisions here. One of course is the one with respect to roe versus wade, where there was the leaked majority draft opinion. We also have the concealed carry rule in New York State. Give us a preface here on these decisions. Are they really likely to be as profoundly important as we think they are? Or is it possible for us to over read the significance of them? So it depends what the Supreme Court does, right? I think there's a good chance in the Second Amendment case that the Supreme Court is going to issue a pretty narrow decision. It will probably uphold the gun rights claim, but narrowly. So in that case, it involves a New York concealed carry law. The petitioners were actually asking the Supreme Court to hold that there is a Second Amendment right to carry a handgun, perhaps other weapon as well outside the home. In justice Scalia's famous decision in District of Columbia versus Heller, the court focused on the right to have a handgun inside the home. And the petition was saying, hey, let's recognize a right outside the home too. And the Supreme Court declined to decline to even take up that question. They said, no, no, we're going to exercise a more we're going to look at a more narrow issue of whether it was okay for New York to deny the permit in this case. So I think there's at least a chance for a narrow decision there. Now that doesn't mean we'll get a narrow decision, but there's a good chance for it. In the Dobbs case, the Mississippi abortion case, which effectively bans abortion after about 15 weeks, the draft opinion is not narrow at all. The draft opinion overturns roe versus wade and Planned Parenthood versus Casey. It is possible. Lisa the public in the spring, but it actually dates from February. It is certainly possible that between February and June, the Supreme Court could change its mind. But based on the oral argument of dogs, I actually thought there was already a good chance that the Supreme Court was going to overturn roe versus wade and Planned Parenthood versus Casey. So I would be surprised if they pulled back from a broad opinion in jobs. And professor finally, one last one that may be of particular importance to the Bloomberg audience, which is the EPA decision. So I think we're going the case is very interesting because the case was initially a challenge to an Obama administration program on the environment. Then the Trump administration got rid of that, then there was a chance there was a challenge to the Trump administration's decision not to have it. The Biden administration now has said we are not going to have either rule. We're drafting our own. So it's not clear what the Supreme Court is actually reviewing in this case. But nonetheless, my prediction is that the Supreme Court is probably going to issue a decision narrowing the authority of the administrative state. I think the question is how that decision is going to be worded. Is the Supreme Court going to say in this particular context, administrative agencies can't act or is it going to make a broader ruling about the authority of the administrative state writ large? My guess is it's not going to go in the broader direction yet. Yet, exactly the important word there. Thank you so much. It's always great to have you with us. That's professor Tara Lee grove of the University of Texas, Austin. Let's get a quick check now on the markets because they are moving today with Abigail Doolittle. So Abigail, how are we doing? Well, we certainly have a nice rally on our hands. Most of the major indexes up 2% or more. And the big question here, David, could be, is this a continuation of that Powell pop, because of course, on the FOMC minute meeting after they raise race, we also had fed chair Jay Powell will talk about don't get used to the idea that they're 75 bps will be the normal going ahead. Now we had stock selling off on Thursday then into Friday on recession fears. But over the last four days, the S&P 500 is actually higher. So let's see whether or not that continues. And then you also have something interesting going on with Friday was options expiration. It was triple witching, often you get that out of the way that can create the room for some bullish action as well. And you know, it's interesting because we have tech up, despite the fact that rates are higher, that's not so common, but that tells you how comfortable investors are and it's on above average volume, oil stabilizing, Bitcoin stabilizing, it all could come down to that dollar coming in a bit. Absolutely, but I mean, you're so good on the technicals. Give me a sense now, because I think the big question a lot of people have is this a bear market rally, which means we've still got a ways to go, or whether this could be actually a bottoming of the market, moving back up. I would say absolutely a bear market rally. Absolutely. Absolutely. How much equivocation there? No. Right now, based on everything that I'm seeing, but it could be a pretty solid one, a multi week one, but yeah, so it would be surprising to see stocks not go lower than they've been so far. Okay, thank you so much. There are no bad facts. It might not like it, but there are no bad facts. Thank you so much to Bloomberg's Abigail Doolittle. Coming up. Today's
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"The Russian people about events in Ukraine But first this week the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold four days of hearings for judge katangi Brown Jackson's nomination to serve on the Supreme Court For more on what to expect I spoke with university of Alabama law professor Tara Lee grove Judge Jackson has been meeting with senators one on one which is pretty common when someone gets nominated to the United States Supreme Court They have these one on one meetings with senators just to the senators can get to know them The first day should just be opening statements by the senator maybe by some of judge Jackson's close supporters close friends and judge Jackson herself And then in the subsequent days we'll probably see senators questioning her about a range of a range of issues So what are the issues here As a practical matter we know a lot about her She has quite a remarkable record in the case of having been in private practice having been a public defender but also having worked for some big law firms having been a trial court judge disregard judge and now for a short time in the Court of Appeals She's got a pretty extensive record What are the questions about it So typically senators want to know what they call the Supreme Court nominees judicial philosophy how will this nominee approach constitutional interpretation How will this nominee approach statutory interpretation How does this nominee think about judging As you note judge Jackson has been a judge for quite some time We have a pretty good sense of her approach to judging But that typically tends to be the questions I will say I think many people say it's just kabuki theater we don't actually learn very much from the nominee And in recent confirmation hearings nominees haven't said a lot about how they will rule in particular cases and they shouldn't right Judges should not say how they might rule either in particular cases or in particular contexts So that makes a lot of sense But we can still get a good sense of how much the judge knows about the law and judge Jackson knows a tremendous amount So I think we'll get a sense of her familiarity with a wide variety of areas of law I also think the confirmation hearings are interesting because of the questions the senators ask I think we learn as much about the United States senators and their familiarity with constitutional law and other areas of law as we do about the nominees themselves So judicial philosophy I understand judicial temperament certainly is something that's really important on any court and specifically on the Supreme Court At the same time we now see some people in the Senate raising questions about some of the defendants that this judge represented when she was a public defender Is that fair game I mean someone was a criminal defender and represent some people who perhaps ended up getting convicted as many people do Should that be counted against them I think the fact that judge Jackson was a public defender should count in her favor because this is the kind of experience that very few members of the Supreme Court have had certainly in a very long time The last public defender was thurgood Marshall or former public defender was thurgood Marshall And this offers a perspective on the U.S. Supreme Court that I think is quite valuable There are lots of people who have been former prosecutors who have turned into judges I think there's real value in having someone who has been on the other side And the reality is we have a zealous advocacy system This is what lawyers do Lawyers represent their clients and try to do it to the best of their ability And so if one is a public defender when it's going to be defending people who may have or maybe accused of having done some terrible things And that's the job You give them the best representation possible and that's what makes the system work So no I don't think it's fair game to criticize her for what her clients may or may not have done Professor it's in my experience impossible to know what a person will do once they're on the Supreme Court They're appointed for life and they often end up different than you think But just speculate here a little bit what difference do you think potentially could judge Jackson make on the Supreme Court People are saying look it's not going to change the tilt the balance between so called left so called right Sometimes she will be the first black woman ever on the Supreme Court if she is in fact confirmed So I think on some of the major issues like abortion or gun rights judge Jackson will not defer tremendously in her votes from justice Breyer There may be some areas I think criminal law is one of them where her votes will actually differ from justice Breyer or could differ But in many areas they won't It'll still be what people view as a 6 to three supermajority super conservative majority on the Supreme Court I actually think it matters a lot to have different perspectives in the discussions themselves We don't know what the Supreme Court's discussions look like Those are always in closed secrecy even the law clerks can't be in the room even other workers at the Supreme Court can't be in the room But I think it's valuable to have people with different experiences as part of those discussions because the reality is we all look at the law and issues from our own background experiences and people with different experiences can help others see things in a different way I encourage my students to talk to other students just to get a sense of well how does someone how do you see this issue because we all see things differently And I think the discussions can be valuable even if some of the votes at the end of the day turn out to be the same Thanks to university of Alabama law professor Tara Leigh grove Radio free Europe closed its Moscow bureau after the Russian invasion of Ukraine But that hasn't stopped them from broadcasting news into Russia from abroad I caught up with CEO Jamie fly for more on how they are spreading uncensored news around the world.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Radio I'm David Weston next week There's four days of hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee for judge kanta Brown Jackson For her nomination to the United States Supreme Court to set the stage for us we welcome now professor Tara Lee grove of the university of Alabama law school So professor thanks so much for being back with us What are we expecting to happen What should happen Right so thank you for having me Judge Jackson has been meeting with senators one on one this week which is pretty common when someone gets nominated to the United States Supreme Court They have these one on one meetings with senators just to the senators can get to know them And next week judge Jackson will start the public hearings And so people will be able to see her interactions with the Senate and this will be with the Senate Judiciary Committee The first day should just be opening statements by the senator maybe by some of judge Jackson's close supporters close friends and by judge Jackson herself And then in the subsequent days we'll probably see senators questioning her about a range of a range of issues So what are the issues here As a practical matter we know a lot about her She has quite a remarkable record in the case of having been in private practice having been a public defender but also having worked for some big law firms having been a trial court judge disregard judge and now for a short time in the Court of Appeals She's got a pretty extensive record What are the questions about it So typically senators want to know what they call the Supreme Court nominees judicial philosophy how will this nominee approach constitutional interpretation How will this nominee approach statutory interpretation How does this nominee think about judging As you note Dutch Jackson has been a judge for quite some time We have a pretty good sense of her approach to judging But that typically tends to be the questions I will say I think many people say it's just kabuki theater We don't actually learn very much from the nominee And in recent confirmation hearings nominees haven't said a lot about how they will rule in particular cases And they shouldn't right Judges should not say how they might rule either in particular cases or in particular contexts So that makes a lot of sense But we can still get a good sense of how much the judge knows about the law and judge Jackson knows a tremendous amount So I think we'll get a sense of her familiarity with a wide variety of areas of law I also think the confirmation hearings are interesting because of the questions the senators ask I think we learn as much about the United States senators and their familiarity with constitutional law and other areas of law as we do about the nominees themselves So judicial philosophy I understand judicial temperament certainly is something that's really important on any court and specifically on the Supreme Court At the same time we now see some people in the Senate raising questions about some of the defendants that this judge represented when she was a public defender Is that fair game I mean someone was a criminal defender and represent some people who perhaps ended up getting convicted as many people do Should that be counted against them I think the fact that judge Jackson was a public defender should count in her favor because this is the kind of experience that very few members of the Supreme Court have had certainly in a very long time the last public defender was thurgood Marshall or former public defender was thurgood Marshall And this offers a perspective on the U.S. Supreme Court that I think is quite valuable There are lots of people who have been former prosecutors who have turned into judges I think there's real value in having someone who has been on the other side And the reality is we have a zealous advocacy system This is what lawyers do Lawyers represent their clients and try to do it to the best of their ability And so if one is a public defender when it's going to be defending people who may have maybe accused of having done some terrible things And that's the job You give them the best representation possible and that's what makes the system work So no I don't think it's fair game to criticize her for what her clients may or may not have done Professor it's in my experience impossible to know what a person will do once they're on the Supreme Court They're appointed for life and they often end up different than you think But just speculate here a little bit what difference do you think potentially could judge Jackson make on the Supreme Court People are saying look it's not going to change the tilt the balance between so called left so called right Sometimes she will be the first black woman ever on the Supreme Court if she is in fact confirmed So I think on some of the major issues like abortion or gun rights judge Jackson will not defer tremendously in her votes from justice Breyer There may be some areas I think criminal law is one of them where her votes will actually differ from justice Breyer or could differ But in many areas they won't It will still be what people view as a 6 to three supermajority super major super conservative majority on the Supreme Court I actually think it matters a lot to have different perspectives in the discussions themselves We don't know what the Supreme Court's discussions look like Those are always in closed secrecy even the law clerks can't be in the room even other workers at the Supreme Court can't be in the room But I think it's valuable to have people with different experiences as part of those discussions because the reality is we all look at the law and issues from our own background experiences and people with different experiences can help others see things in a different way I encourage my students to talk to other students just to get a sense of well how does someone how do you see this issue because we all see things differently And I think the discussions can be valuable even if some of the votes at the end of the day turn out to be the same And it's not irrelevant that she is relatively young I mean because it used to be that justice were appointed well into their 60s maybe even well into their 60s and had a relatively short time in the.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Appeals It's hard to know why they turned around The other way At the same time this is not likely to shift the ideological balance if I can call it that in the Supreme Court Anytime soon But she is young She is and that's very important So in the immediate future will there be different votes on some of the hot button issues like abortion or affirmative action or gun rights or the administrative state probably not I think judge Jackson will be similar to justice justice Breyer who will be retiring At least on those issues Over the long term this matters a lot because it had justice Breyer left the court during a different administration that could have changed the balance from what is considered to be a 6 to three supermajority of a conservative super majority to a 72 conservative supermajority And that matters I do want to say I think it's important that judge Jackson was formerly a public defender not only because that provides some background diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court But I also think her votes in criminal cases may be different from those of justice Breyer And so I think in that in that area judge Jackson may actually present a change on the U.S. Supreme Court One thing that struck me as you just mentioned she's replacing she would be replacing if confirms you replacing justice Breyer She clicked for justice Breyer and it strikes me that this is not the first time this happened This has happened in the very recent past with Neil Gorsuch And Brett Kavanaugh clerked for justice Kennedy who had the justice that he replaced Yet it's very interesting the trajectory has been that we nominate former Supreme Court clerks to the U.S. Supreme Court and sometimes to replace the justice for whom they worked sometimes to work with the justice for whom they worked Lee this was also true of chief justice Roberts when he took the seat that had been held by chief justice rehnquist At the same time if she is confirmed she'll be going to a court that perhaps is more politicized than some in recent times And they have some very big cases as you know you follow these things still to come down including for example the role against wade decision that we expect later this term How difficult will that make it for her stepping out of this court where there's so much political really scrutiny of everything the court says does thinks about So I anticipate she will not take over until the summer what justice Breyer said was he was going to stay on until the end of this term assume and then you would retire assuming that somebody was confirmed And I think the idea was to get someone confirmed who could step in over the summer And so I think judge Jackson is likely to be justice Jackson starting next term So she probably will not hear the dogs the abortion case from Mississippi It's possible but my guess is justice Breyer will finish out this term Still there are going to be some very hot button issues coming along along the pike next year including affirmative action and whether that's still going to be allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court Thanks to university of Alabama law professor Tara Lee grove Coming up handling or mishandling classified documents does.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Committee chairman sherrod Brown on getting past the stalemate over President Biden's 5 fed nominees and former president Trump could be in trouble for his mishandling of classified documents while in office But first this week president Joe Biden said he will nominate judge katangi Brown Jackson to be the first black woman on the Supreme Court Judge Jackson deserves to be confirmed as the next justice of the Supreme Court I've met with the chairman and ranking members of the Senate Judiciary Committee senator dick Durbin senator chuck grassley and my hope is that they will move promptly and I know they'll move fairly And historic selection that would add a fresh liberal voice with new life experience to the court without changing its conservative tilt For more on the effect on the court I spoke with university of Alabama law professor Terra Lee grove This will be the first African American woman on the U.S. Supreme Court Judge Jackson is also the first person since thurgood Marshall who has experience as a public defender in criminal cases which will be a huge change I think it's going to be it's a momentous momentous moment for the Supreme Court One of the things that struck me I worked there you've worked there She has a very diverse background And I'm not talking about just race here At all I mean she's been a public defender She's also worked at big law firms She's been part of this she's been chairman of the sentencing committee We haven't had that many justices with that diverse background I agree And I think that helps because the U.S. Supreme Court is a generalist court It handles a lot of different cases Some involving corporations some involving criminal criminal work a lot involving sentencing in criminal cases And I think this background is going to be really helpful Judge Jackson has also been a judge now on the district court in D.C. and the D.C. Court of Appeals there are judge Jackson has been exposed to a lot of cases involving federal agencies And that's really important for the Supreme Court's work as well There's the question of confirmation obviously It's too early to tell how this will play out But it did strike me looking at it You're right of course she's on the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals and the federal system But she hasn't been there very long And I wonder whether she gets the best of both worlds she has that credential She has an experience but she doesn't have a big body of work I think that's right Now Josh Jackson was on the district court for a number of years before she joined the Court of Appeals And so she has a body of work from that But she doesn't have a large body of work from the Court of Appeals I think one of the key factors of her recent appointment is that she was confirmed to the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals by the same Senate that will be considering her for the U.S. Supreme Court And she was confirmed you know pretty easily and at least as easy in terms of our current confirmation process And I think that bodes very well for a reasonably smooth confirmation process this time around as well Well it may make it more difficult for some senators to object when they just approved her for the Court of Appeals It's hard to know why they turned around The other way At the same time this is not likely to shift the ideological balance if I can call it them the Supreme Court anytime soon But she is young She is and that's very important So in the immediate future will there be different votes on some of the hot button issues like abortion or affirmative action or gun rights or the administrative state probably not I think judge Jackson will be similar to justice justice Breyer who will be retiring At least on those issues Over the long term this matters a lot because had justice Breyer left the court during a different administration That could have changed the balance from what is considered to be a 6 to three super majority of conservative supermajority to a 7 to two conservative supermajority And that matters I do want to say I think it's important that judge Jackson was formerly a public defender not only because that provides some background diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court But I also think her votes in criminal cases may be different from those of justice Breyer And so I think in that in that area judge Jackson may actually present a change on the U.S. Supreme Court One thing that struck me as you just mentioned she's replacing she would be replacing if confirmed She'd be replacing justice Breyer She clicked for justice Breyer and it strikes me that this is not the first time this happened This has happened in the very recent past with Neil Gorsuch And Brett Kavanaugh clerked for justice Kennedy who had the justice that he replaced Yet it's very interesting the trajectory has been that we nominate former Supreme Court clerks to the U.S. Supreme Court and sometimes to replace the justice for whom they worked sometimes to work with the justice for whom they worked Believe this was also true of chief justice Roberts when he took the seat that had been held by chief justice rehnquist At the same time if she is confirmed she'll be going to a court that perhaps is more politicized than some in recent times And they have some very big cases as you know you follow these things still to come down including for example the role against wade decision that we expect later this term how difficult will that make it for her stepping out of this court where there's so much political really scrutiny of everything the court says does thinks about So I anticipate she will not take over until the summer but justice Breyer said was he was going to stay on until the end of this term assume and then you would retire assuming that somebody was confirmed And I think the idea was to get someone confirmed who could step in over the summer And so I think judge Jackson is likely to be justice Jackson starting next term So she probably will not hear the dogs the abortion case from Mississippi It's possible but my guess is justice Breyer will finish out this term Still they're going to be some very hot button issues coming along along the pike next year including affirmative action and whether that's still going to be allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court Thanks to university of Alabama law professor Tara Lee grove Coming up handling or mishandling classified documents does former president Trump have a problem I ask former Watergate prosecutor Nick Ackerman that's next you're listening to balance of power on Bloomberg radio This is Bloomberg.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"It's hard to know why they turned around The other way At the same time this is not likely to shift the ideological balance if I can call it that in the Supreme Court Anytime soon But she is young She is and that's very important So in the immediate future will there be different votes on some of the hot button issues like abortion or affirmative action or gun rights or the administrative state probably not I think judge Jackson will be similar to justice justice Breyer who will be retiring At least on those issues Over the long term this matters a lot because had justice Breyer left the court during a different administration That could have changed the balance from what is considered to be a 6 to three supermajority of conservative supermajority to a 72 conservative supermajority And that matters I do want to say I think it's important that judge Jackson was formerly a public defender not only because that provides some background diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court But I also think her votes in criminal cases may be different from those of justice Breyer And so I think in that in that area judge Jackson may actually present a change on the U.S. Supreme Court One thing that struck me as you just mentioned she's replacing she would be replacing if confirmed she would be replacing justice Breyer She clicked for justice Breyer and it strikes me that this is not the first time this happened This has happened in the very recent past with Neil Gorsuch And Brett Kavanaugh clerked for justice Kennedy who had the justice that he replaced Yet it's very interesting the trajectory has been that we nominate former Supreme Court clerks to the U.S. Supreme Court and sometimes to replace the justice for whom they work sometimes to work with the justice for whom they worked Lee this was also true of chief justice Roberts when he took the seat that had been held by chief justice rehnquist At the same time if she is confirmed she'll be going to a court that perhaps is more politicized than some in recent times And they have some very big cases as you know you follow these things still to come down including for example the role against wade decision that we expect later this term How difficult will that make it for her stepping out of this court where there's so much political really scrutiny of everything the court says does thinks about So I anticipate she will not take over until the summer what justice Breyer said was he was going to stay on until the end of this term Assume and then you would retire assuming that somebody was confirmed And I think the idea was to get someone confirmed who could step in over the summer And so I think judge Jackson is likely to be justice Jackson starting next term So she probably will not hear the dogs the abortion case from Mississippi It's possible but my guess is justice Breyer will finish out this term Still there are going to be some very hot button issues coming along the pike next year including affirmative action and whether that's still going to be allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court Thanks to university of Alabama law professor Tara Lee grove Coming up handling or mishandling classified documents does former.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"The state of American energy is strong Our nation has the resources and the expertise to meet our energy needs Eventually we'll end up with a vaccine that will be able to do better against multiple variants Where the world of politics meets the world of business The fed has to raise rates And by the way that's a good thing Because of inflation has been this historic pandemic which is upended life in so many different ways and particularly has upended America's supply chains Balance of power with David Weston on Bloomberg radio Coming up this hour my conversation with doctor Anthony Fauci about pulling back on COVID restrictions and whether we need a fourth shot Plus Senate banking committee chairman sherrod Brown on getting past the stalemate over President Biden's 5 fed nominees and former president Trump could be in trouble for his mishandling of classified documents while in office But first this week president Joe Biden said he will nominate judge katangi Brown Jackson to be the first black woman on the Supreme Court Judge Jackson deserves to be confirmed as the next justice of the Supreme Court I've met with the chairman and ranking members of the Senate Judiciary Committee senator dick Durbin senator chuck grassley and my hope is that they will move promptly and I know they'll move fairly And historic selection that would add a fresh liberal voice with new life experience to the court without changing its conservative tilt For more on the effect on the court I spoke with university of Alabama law professor Tara Lee grove This will be the first African American woman on the U.S. Supreme Court Judge Jackson is also the first person since thurgood Marshall who has experience as a public defender in criminal cases which will be a huge change I think it's going to be it's a momentous momentous moment for the Supreme Court One of the things that struck me I worked there you've worked there She has a very diverse background And I'm not talking about just race here At all I mean she's been a public defender She's also worked at big law firms She's been part of the chairman of the sensing committee We haven't had that many justices with that diverse of background I agree And I think that helps because the U.S. Supreme Court is a generalist court It handles a lot of different cases Some involving corporations some involving criminal criminal work a lot involving sentencing in criminal cases And I think this background is going to be really helpful Judge Jackson has also been a judge now on the district court in D.C. and the D.C. Court of Appeals there are judge Jackson has been exposed to a lot of cases involving federal agencies and that's really important for the Supreme Court's work as well There's the question of confirmation obviously It's too early to tell how this will play out But it did strike me looking at it You're right of course she's on the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals in the federal system But she hasn't been there very long And I wonder whether she gets the best of both worlds she has that credential She has an experience but she doesn't have a big body of work I think that's right Now judge Jackson was on the district court for a number of years before she joined the Court of Appeals And so she has a body of work from that But she doesn't have a large body of work from the Court of Appeals I think one of the key factors of her recent appointment is that she was confirmed to the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals by the same Senate that will be considering her for the U.S. Supreme Court And she was confirmed you know pretty easily and at least as easy in terms of our current confirmation process And I think that bodes very well for a reasonably smooth confirmation process this time around as well Well it may make it more difficult for some senators to object when they just approved her for the Court of Appeals It's hard to know why they turned around The other way At the same time this is not likely to shift the ideological balance if I can call it that in the Supreme Court anytime soon But she is young She is and that's very important So in the immediate future will there be different votes on some of the hot button issues like abortion or affirmative action or gun rights or the administrative state probably not I think judge Jackson will be similar to justice justice Breyer who will be retiring At least on those issues over the long term this matters a lot because had justice Breyer left the court during a different administration that could have changed the balance from what is considered to be a 6 to three super majority of conservatives who were majority to a 7 to two conservative supermajority And that matters I do want to say I think it's important that judge Jackson was formerly a public defender not only because that provides some background diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court But I also think her votes in criminal cases may be different from those of justice Breyer And so I think in that in that area judge Jackson may actually present a change on the U.S. Supreme Court One thing that struck me as you just mentioned she's replacing she would be replacing if confirms you're replacing justice Breyer She clicked for justice Breyer and it strikes me that this is not the first time this happened This has happened in the very recent past with Neil Gorsuch And Brett Kavanaugh clerked for justice Kennedy who had the justice that he replaced Yet it's very interesting the trajectory has been that we nominate former Supreme Court clerks to the U.S. Supreme Court and sometimes to replace the justice for whom they worked sometimes to work with the justice for whom they worked This was also true of chief justice Roberts when he took the seat that had been held by chief justice rehnquist At the same time if she is confirmed she'll be going to a court that perhaps is more politicized than some in recent times And they have some very big cases as you know you follow these things still to come down including for example the role against wade decision that we expect later this term how difficult will that make it for her stepping out of this court where there's so much political really scrutiny of everything the court says does thinks about So I anticipate she will not take over until the summer what justice Breyer said was he was going to stay on until the end of this term Assume and then you would retire assuming that somebody was confirmed And I think the idea was to get someone confirmed who could step in over the summer And so I think judge Jackson is likely to be justice Jackson starting next term So she probably will not hear the dogs the abortion case from Mississippi It's possible but my guess is justice Breyer will finish out this term Still there are going to be some very hot button issues coming along along the pike next year including affirmative action and whether that's still going to be allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court Thanks to university of Alabama law professor Tara Lee grove Coming up handling or mishandling classified documents does former president Trump have a problem I ask former Watergate prosecutor Nick Ackerman that's next you're listening to balance of.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Two one And liftoff of falcon 9 starting four after them Slow coming 70 seconds or so David We're going to hit that moment of max Q the maximum aerodynamic pressure on this vessel carrying 50 Starlink satellites It's pretty routine by this point right you and I have covered these launches a number of times but the backdrop is more complicated because SpaceX and NASA have been in this kind of indirect back and forth over the potential risk that the consolation poses to the International Space Station NASA's basically concerned that is this constellation grows it could literally have satellites banging into the International Space Station over the course of the next decade something that SpaceX is basically responded with That's nonsense Our system is completely safe but they're really trying to ramp up activity in 2022 versus what they did in 2021 Yeah for our radio audience what we're watching on TV is this missile go up into a bright blue sky at one point we saw a shot back down the rocket You can see the coast of California actually It was quite dramatic And I wanted to pick up on that satellites at a time At some point it's got to get pretty crowded up there doesn't it Yeah so right now we're just above 2000 satellites in constellation The FCC is authorized SpaceX for 12,000 satellites at various altitudes and SpaceX hope is to add another 30,000 additionally to that taking the total to 42,000 which our colleagues at Bloomberg intelligence estimate won't be completed for at least a decade but it is getting pretty crowded up there And that's what I was talking about in this back and forth with NASA it prompted SpaceX to do something they don't normally do which is communicate with the public They posted this blog post on their website basically explaining that they are completely safe No matter the volume of satellites in constellation they're safe because they are self cleaning and what that means is that if the satellite enters a dangerous or non moving orbit it simply orients itself and falls back down to earth They also said that SpaceX overly complies with regulations which it says are basically archaic and are overly cautious with regards to protecting other things in orbit like the International Space Station And as you do so often you've taught me something I had not heard of self cleaning satellites Self hating silence I didn't know about it So that's our Bloomberg's Ed ludlow is reporting from California We'll be checking back in on that space flight as it develops In the meantime I want to come back down here to earth President Biden is now made his nomination for the Supreme Court It is judge Brown Jackson on the D.C. circuit Terribly grow Professor of law at University of Alabama is here to really explain to us why this is such an important appointment So thank you so much professor for being with us This is a breakthrough in several respects Yes it is This will be the first African American woman on the U.S. Supreme Court Judge Jackson is also the first person since thurgood Marshall who has experienced as a public defender in criminal cases which will be a huge change I think it's going to be it's a momentous momentous moment for the Supreme Court One of the things that struck me I worked there you've worked there She has a very diverse background And I'm not talking about just race here At all I mean she's been a public defender She's also worked at big law firms She's been part of this she's been chairman of the sensing committee We haven't had that many justices with that diverse background I agree And I think that helps because the U.S. Supreme Court is a generalist court It handles a lot of different cases Some involving corporations some involving criminal criminal work a lot involving sentencing in criminal cases And I think this background is going to be really helpful Judge Jackson has also been a judge now on the district court in D.C. and the D.C. Court of Appeals And that there are judge Jackson has been exposed to a lot of cases involving federal agencies And that's really important for the Supreme Court to work as well There's the question of confirmation obviously It's too early to tell how this will play out But it did strike me looking at it You're right of course she's on the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals and the federal system But she hasn't been there very long And I wonder whether she gets the best of both worlds she has that credential she has an experience but she doesn't have a big body of work I think that's right Now just Jackson was on the district court for a number of years before she joined the Court of Appeals And so she has a body of work from that But she doesn't have a large body of work from the Court of Appeals I think one of the key factors of her recent appointment is that she was confirmed to the D.C. circuit Court of Appeals by the same Senate that will be considering her for the U.S. Supreme Court And she was confirmed you know pretty easily and at least as easy in terms of our current confirmation process And I think that bodes very well for a reasonably smooth confirmation process this time around as well Well it may make it more difficult for some senators to object when they just approved her for the Court of Appeals It's hard to know why they turned around The other way At the same time this is not likely to shift the ideological balance if I can call it that in the Supreme Court Anytime soon But she is young She is and that's very important So in the immediate future will there be different votes on some of the hot button issues like abortion or affirmative action or gun rights or the administrative state probably not I think judge Jackson will be similar to justice justice Breyer who will be retiring At least on those issues Over the long term this matters a lot because I had justice Breyer left the court during a different administration that could have changed the balance from what is considered to be a 6 to three supermajority of a conservative super majority to a 72 conservative supermajority And that matters I do want to say I think it's important that judge Jackson was formerly a public defender not only because that provides some background diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court But I also think her votes in criminal cases may be different from those of justice Breyer And so I think in that in that area judge Jackson may actually present a change on the U.S. Supreme Court One thing that struck me as you just mentioned she's replacing she would be replacing if confirmed she would be replacing justice Breyer She clicked for justice Breyer and it strikes me that this is not the first time this happened This has happened in the very recent past with Neil Gorsuch And Brett Kavanaugh clerked for justice Kennedy who had the justice that he replaced Yet it's very interesting the trajectory has been that we nominate former Supreme Court clerks to the U.S. Supreme Court and sometimes to replace the justice for whom they work sometimes to work with the justice for whom they worked Believe this was also true of chief justice Roberts when he took the seat that had been held by chief justice rehnquist At the same time if she is confirmed she'll be going to a court that perhaps is more politicized than some in recent times And they have some very big cases as you know you follow these things still to come down including for example the role against wade decision that we expect later this term How difficult will that make it for her stepping out of this court where there's so much political really scrutiny of everything the court says does thinks about So I anticipate she will not take over until the summer what justice Breyer said was he was going to stay on until the end of this term Assume and then you would retire assuming that somebody was confirmed And I think the idea was to get someone confirmed who could step in over the summer And so I think judge Jackson is likely to be justice Jackson starting next term So she probably will not hear the dogs the abortion case from Mississippi It's possible but my guess is justice Breyer will finish out this term Still there are going to be some very hot button issues coming along along the pike next year including affirmative action and whether that's still going to be allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court Okay it's always great to have you with this professor That's professor Tara Lee grove of the university of Alabama school of law I want to keep you up to date on that space X launch It is proceeding apace The first phase is completing and the booster I'm told is lanny We'll keep showing that.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Infantry led the gain Pandemic era shortages have left business stockpiles lean Consumer spending also picked up as did a measure of inflation Then he doubt Judas Bloomberg radio Chevron shares that a record after the oil giant announced a larger than expected dividend increase Chevron up now by 8 tenths of 1% recapping lows of a day on the S&P were down 30 down 7 tenths I'm Charlie peleton Matthew is a Bloomberg business flash Charlie thank you from the Bloomberg interactive broker studio I'm Joe Matthew in for David Weston and joining us now university of Alabama law school professor Tara Lee grove along with Bloomberg laws June grosso It's great to have you back June Great to be here It's great to have our panel here If we can call it that Tara thanks for joining us We heard it live on balance of power last hour President Biden addressing the nation to confirm what we learned This time yesterday of course Supreme Court Justice Stephen breyer retiring He called it a bittersweet moment Joe Biden reminding us that then senator Biden presided over breyer's confirmation hearing before the judiciary committee he called justice breyer a model public servant At a time of division in this country terror is that a good way to describe the outgoing justice I think that it's absolutely what justice breyer has thought to do throughout his career He is a consensus builder and he's tried very hard to see the other side as having legitimate concerns even if he tries to persuade them June we heard in the newscast the moment the big moment really I think for the president there was to stop down He said I've made no decision although it looks like he has started reading the opinions of some of the folks on the short list He said the person I will nominate will be someone of extraordinary qualifications He went on to say quote and will be the first black woman ever nominated to the Supreme Court I don't know how much question there was surrounding that but he says he will make good on his campaign promise I think that most people took him at his word because he has said it more than once But today confirmed it He said that he's going to make the decision by the end of February now I have to believe that they've already started work on this long before this date And you know there is that list of the most likely candidates And so far it remains at the top of the list remains at just judge excuse me Katangi Brown Jackson and also California Supreme Court judge Leona Kruger But last night I was watching TV and majority whip House majority whip James Clyburn was on and he was talking about another South Carolina district court judge Michelle childs So it might be more interesting than we had first thought Tara Chuck Schumer says he wants to do this Amy Coney Barrett style and by that he means in 30 days do you see that possible How quickly could this happen So it's theoretically possible My guess is there's not going to be a lot of pressure to do that Just as briar has announced that his retirement will take effect at the end of the Supreme Court's current term We just typically laid June or early July So President Biden makes the nomination by late February They don't need to do it in so called justice Amy Coney Barrett style They're going to have a couple of months to get through the confirmation process And I think for that reason there's not going to be a need to do that I think the statement was to reflect the nomination will go forward pretty quickly I don't know if you heard our conversation a little bit earlier June with the senator from Tennessee Marsha Blackburn joined us to talk about she's on judiciary Of course and she put a statement out when of course this was all made official And it reads quote it is telling that the opportunity for President Biden to nominate a new justice will be right before an election She didn't go too much further with that with me but you know where this is going Are we going to have this double standard again May I first point out one thing that senator Blackburn has I believe voted against every single Biden nomination to district courts The lower court district court and the circuit courts So I wouldn't put too much force with liberal justices who have no not with the help of the Republicans though because there are only three Republicans which I mentioned yesterday who have broken with their Republican colleagues and that at times that senators Susan Collins Lisa Murkowski and Lindsey Graham But I think when we first heard about this an election is near It was Mitch McConnell as a fiction For keeping Merrick Garland off the bench And then he used it again to put Amy Coney Barrett on the bench That has always been a presidential election as far as he has and it's a fiction as far as he's used it not a midterm election Well here we are you know a year out almost from that date tera do you think we're going to hear this line Again is this going to be an issue So I think it's I think the issue will be brought up I don't think it's going to be an issue this time around because the Senate is controlled albeit barely controlled by the same party as the president I do believe that going forward if the president and the Senate are controlled by different political parties there will be no justices confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court no matter how far we are from either congressional election or a presidential election And I think that's the point that we have come to in this process I think that's extraordinarily unfortunate for the country and for the Supreme Court But I think that's where we're at I don't think that's going to happen this time around And that's not only because the Democrats have their control of the Senate But also because this nomination and confirmation process is not going to be seen as pivotal Justice breyer is going to be replaced by someone that many of us will presume will vote in ways that are very similar to the way the justice breyer has ruled And typically the big fights have come up when one anticipates a big change in the direction of the Supreme Court It is a good point that we need to remember This is not change the makeup of the court Right exactly But senator McConnell by the way just confirming what the professor said senator McConnell has basically said that if he retakes the Senate he's not going to accept any nominations by he's not going to put any nominations by President Biden forward which that is so different from the way the process is supposed to work It's not supposed to be this political and you're not supposed to I mean I don't know if any other and the professor is a student of his history of the Supreme Court I don't know if any other majority leader of the Senate has ever done that has not put a candidate forward as a nominee Because the president was not from his party Just a minute left terror does that does that begin to corrode the credibility of the confirmation process overall I think the confirmation process has been going on a downward spiral for a number of decades Starting with the lower cords but most recently at the Supreme Court level And yes it's getting extraordinarily bad And I think the big risk that we face in the Supreme Court is not the expansion of the Supreme Court a little bit could happen It's rather the subtraction of the Supreme Court because if there is a Senate from a different political party than the president Steve will not be filled In the death spiral of the confirmation process we're just getting started This is something Thanks to university of Alabama law school.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Make sure we get Americans back to work Let's check these numbers The S&P's now down a quarter of a percent down ten The Dow's up a quarter of a percent of 83 and the NASDAQ is down three quarters of 1% down a 112 The ten year is down 1730 seconds the yield is 1.78% West Texas intermediate crude is down three quarters of 1% 78 86 a barrel Comics golds up two 10% at 1793 ten per ounce The dollar yen one 1566 the Euro dollar 1354 the pound $1 35 75 Is your good times for the fertilizer market with record prices have been strong demand but the world's largest producers in disarray after losing two CEOs in less than a year investors want to know what happened Surprise exit this week of nutrient CEO Mayo Schmidt to 8 months into the job as fuel concerned about corporates and government at the Canadian company That is a Bloomberg business flash I'm Greg Jarrett Now more Bloomberg balance of power with David Weston Right here on Bloomberg radio This is balance of power on Bloomberg television and radio I'm David Weston The Supreme Court today is hearing arguments in challenges to two of the Biden administration's vaccine mandates One applicable to all companies with more than 100 employees the other applicable to workers at healthcare facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid programs To explain the challenges and what may be at stake we welcome now professor Tara Lee grove of the university of Alabama school of law So professor thanks so much great to have you back with us First of all let's address one procedural thing if we could I love procedure It's a little unusual because this is not a typical case that's come up fully briefed and decided below This is like an emergency basis That is correct So the challenges are asking the Supreme Court to issue a stay in really an injunction to prevent the prevent the administration's order from going into effect So I think it would start on Monday And they want to prevent that from going into effect And to be clear the order from the occupational safety and health administration is not a vaccine mandate It's a requirement that employers either get employees vaccinated or have testing and masking requirements So no one actually has to get vaccinated under this order Yeah really important clarification Thank you for that That's the one that applies to all employers who have more than a hundred employees At the same time explain to me the basis for the challenge Why are the challengers the states particularly saying that this would be illegal Because as I understand the solicitor general in the argument said that they projected that something like 6500 workers might lose their lives over the next 6 months if they didn't have this requirement So a lot of this comes down to statutory interpretation and the scope of osha's regulatory authority So typically osha can make regulations that are reasonably necessary to safety and health And when they do that they have to go through a process that's called noticing comment rulemaking and this is where an agency asks for outsiders to come in and weigh in on a particular rule It's a very democratic process A lot of people can weigh in but it also takes a very long time So the osha act also allows allows osha to act on an emergency basis And Congress said they can do that when a regulation is necessary to protect the safety and health of workers And that's the authority that the agency used in this case And so with the challengers challengers are saying is that you need to meet a higher burden to show that something is necessary so that you can act on an emergency basis The government agrees with that that there has to be a higher burden that says that in the midst of a global pandemic they have met it Well I wonder just again go back to process for a little bit Do they have the record in front of them that would indicate how big an emergency this is Or do they take judicial notice the fact that an awful lot of people have omo crown right now So that's a really good question The record that osha created And it did create a pretty extensive record It created a couple of months ago in the context of delta And so there was an interesting moment at the oral argument People talked about both the record before the agency at the time and also recent evidence about Omaha and its spread something that justice breyer brought up a couple of times I think that the court will have to judge it on the record before osha but at the same time because the challenges are challenges are asking for an injunction and considering whether an injunction in his days appropriate right now the court would probably need to take into account what is going on right now As you've pointed out professor there are two very different mandates here applicable to different entities Is it possible conceivable that the court might split the difference Say no to one and yes to the other Absolutely And which one is the more likely to be upheld So I think that the I think the regulation of medical personnel is probably a little bit easier The challengers in the other case were saying it's not that osha can't do anything They said that osha has just overshot in this particular instance that osha is regulating all businesses with a hundred or more employees and the challengers say ocean needs to be needs to go business by business and try to figure things out The agency of course replied this is a pandemic where we've discovered that vaccination helps vaccination and masking and testing help for lots and.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"tara lee grove" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"This morning the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the first of two controversial abortion cases do this fall This one a challenge to the Texas statute that the court earlier declined to review when it came up a different way to explain the case and what is at issue Welcome up professor Tara Lee grove of the university of Alabama law school So welcome back professor great to have you here If you could explain this because there's a Mississippi case that's coming up in early December that is a frontal assault on a challenge to roe versus wade This one's a little different That's right So Texas has structured an unusual law unusual in many respects The Texas law says that abortion procedures are effectively banned 6 weeks after a woman's last period which is four to 6 weeks into pregnancy But it is also said that the Texas attorney general Texas other Texas law enforcement officials can not enforce that state law Into the state law can only be enforced by private individuals and not any particular private individuals but any private individual who wants to bring suit and potentially get a $10,000 bounty That makes it really hard to challenge to bring what's called a pre enforcement challenge And what the Supreme Court is considering this morning is well who can bring that challenge and who can they bring it against So one of the lawsuits is by Holman's health center which has been involved in some other recent Supreme Court litigation And what they argue is that because this lawsuit is so unusual they can bring a challenge that essentially enjoys the state clerks who might who might actually dock at these lawsuits and to get declaratory relief against state judges There's a separate lawsuit by the brought by the United States government The United States government has a lot more leeway to sue the state of Texas than a private individual does because of a doctrine called sovereign immunity And so the United States has brought suit against the state of Texas saying that we can sue the state of Texas and get an injunction against any future private parties who or any current or future private parties who would bring suit to enforce this law And the question is can either of those lawsuits go forward And who can be enjoined So if I could professionalize for a basic question that's occurred to me they can certainly challenge this once and enforcement action is brought under the news Texas state law right And it comes up So what's the rush Why don't you just wait for one of these cases to be brought Right So one of the cases brought in state court of course when the private party brings the lawsuit the provider or whoever is sued And it's important to recognize it's not just abortion providers who can be sued It could be the person who drives a woman to the clinic It can be the person who told potentially to have told the woman about the clinic Someone who holds her hand during the procedure Anyone who is involved could potentially be sued if a lawsuit is filed in state court it's possible someone could get an injunction But only against a particular private party the particular private party who brought that suit And with the Texas law says is that that lawsuit does not prevent other people from bringing suit So then there could be another law student state court Potentially about the same woman who sought that particular procedure And then there would need to be another state injunction And so it's not clear that state course could provide the kind of wide ranging relief that whole woman's health seeks or that the United States seeks So in this case that was heard this morning oral argument if the court were to decide yes it is okay to challenge the statute this way You do have standing It is ripe It is okay the chances of it Does that mean the court necessarily will have to address the merits of the claim that this was really contrary to decision roe versus wade The court would not have to address the merits and I think the court would not address the merits I think the only question before the court right now is whether or one of these one of these entities can bring suit to enjoin the Texas law and who can be enjoined or who can be subject to what's called a declaratory judgment And then I think the Supreme Court would send it back to the lower courts to figure out the merits of the lawsuit What's going with the federal lawsuit is you said there's a separate federal lawsuit which is quite different from this So that was also argued today that United States brought suit against the state of Texas seeking an injunction against any future private party who might bring suit to enforce the law Also said the injunction could go against the clerks of the state judges And so the Supreme Court heard oral argument there as well In some ways the United States lawsuit is easier because it can sue the state of Texas the state of Texas does not get what's called sovereign immunity when it sued by the United States government In other ways the United States lawsuit is very complicated because in the past not always but usually in the past when the United States has brought suit to enforce constitutional rights It has done so pursuant to a congressional statute There is no congressional statute on point in part because this is such an unusual circumstance and an unusual state law So finally how much more are we going to learn about the Supreme Court the nature of the Supreme Court this fall Because we not only have this we have the other Mississippi We also have a gun case coming up later this week So this is a pretty explosive term I mean there are a lot or could be a pretty explosive term There are a lot of big issues There is the lawsuit of SV 8 as you pointed out there's a lawsuit about a Mississippi law that prohibits abortions after around 15 weeks and that is subject to a typical challenge And then later this week there's a challenge that could raise the question whether individuals have a right to bear arms outside the home Now the Supreme Court could decide any one of these cases very broadly potentially changing the law in many different areas It could also decide them very narrowly and just nudge the law in a particular area And I think one of the things people are wondering is whether some of the concerns about the Supreme Court's legitimacy will play into how the Supreme Court rules in these cases How activists is Thank you so much Always great to have you with us It's Alabama lost school professor Tara Lee grove And this is balance of power on Bloomberg television and radio.