00:00So Trump challenging the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In addition, he has asked the
00:05Supreme Court to allow him to fire Fed member Lisa Cook. Expanded powers for Trump could
00:10dramatically reshape American society and have impacts on the economy. For more, we can speak
00:16to Eric Heinze, a professor of law and humanities at the School of Law Queen Mary, University of
00:23London. Hello to you, Eric. Thank you for speaking to Paris Direct. I'll let you choose whether we
00:28begin with free speech or Lisa Cook. But first of all, your reaction as a professor of law to Trump's
00:36seeking expanded powers? Yeah, well, I think one of the things that really stands out
00:43is that many of the people who brought Donald Trump to power were the very people who insisted
00:51on reducing the size of the federal government, on limiting the federal government's
00:57ability to interfere with other people's lives. And of course, we see Trump doing exactly the
01:05opposite with his cheerleaders foursquare behind him. And there's a lot of nuance with the First
01:13Amendment in terms of freedom of speech. There are some limits on what you can and cannot say. But
01:19what Jimmy Kimmel said, did that violate anything? No. Okay, so when we hear Trump supporters and MAGA
01:28supporters saying, you cannot condone Kirk's murder, that's a misinterpretation of the First Amendment.
01:35That's a misinterpretation of what Kimmel was saying. Yeah, first of all, even if he were condemning the
01:42murder, that would not fall afoul of the First Amendment. But it's true that he wasn't condemning
01:48the murder. He was making a completely different point. It wasn't remotely related. Right. It's how
01:53to either condemn you or condoning the murder. Right. It's a reaction about how people have been sort of
01:59exploiting Kirk's death to go after perhaps who they call, quote unquote, the enemy within.
02:05Yes. Yeah, that's quite right. Right. And so now we're looking at Trump trying to do this move with the Fed
02:14and Lisa Cook as well. Could you explain what that's about?
02:19Well, when the Federal Reserve Board was first instituted, it was never under the control of the
02:30executive. It was never under the control of the president. Even when the president appoints to the
02:38Federal Reserve, that requires congressional approval. So it's in fact a joint action. But the president has
02:44no power to remove, to fire a member of the board. Yeah. And now if the Supreme Court does decide in favor
02:55of Trump and has Lisa Cook removed, how much of a dramatic shift is that for the balance of power in
03:02America? It's very, it's dramatic indeed, because, well, for one thing, this has not happened at all
03:10in recent, in recent decades, certainly not with the Federal Reserve. And again, it gets us back to this
03:18point that this very administration, you know, that, you know, that was flomping doge on the idea that
03:26it was going to reduce the size of the federal government or reduce the power of the federal
03:31government has actually, from one day to the next, been increasing its own presidential power.
03:37Do you think the founding fathers would have issue with the way Trump is trying to perhaps expand his
03:48power? Certainly. Yeah, because that's why. Go on, sorry. Yeah, that's why they made a federal
03:58constitution. They were reacting above all against monarchy, against absolutism. They wanted power
04:08to be, to be separated. They wanted systems of checks and balances. Yeah. And if you look back
04:15at history, you don't have to be any great student to see that sometimes when rights are being reigned
04:20in, they're being done precisely to claim they're protecting that right. We're protecting free speech
04:26by limiting what you can say. We're protecting your civil rights by limiting what you can do. Do you
04:32think Donald Trump supporters are aware of this? And if not, how, how could, how would you try to make
04:38them aware? You mean aware of this contradiction? Yes. Yeah, I don't know how you mean, you know,
04:49he, uh, uh, uh, again, I, uh, I, I certainly don't think that all conservatives have fallen for this.
04:58Um, you know, there are certainly, you know, many critically minded conservatives, uh, who have been
05:04vocal, uh, and who know exactly what Trump and his supporters are up to, but as to the hardcore, well,
05:13you know, uh, it's hard to convince any hardcore anywhere on this political spectrum to change
05:21their views. You know, that's not, uh, just true of Trump supporters. This has been true in politics
05:26for a long time. It's yeah. Unfortunately, it's one of the sad prices that we pay for democracy.
05:32Yeah. Some people will not be convinced by, but you know, by facts or by reason. Yeah. And stick to
05:38conspiracy theories to ideologies. And early on in this second administration, one of the things we
05:44saw was a number of law firms being willing to work pro bono for the U S president as a professor
05:50of law. What did you make of that? Yeah, it was pitiful the way it came about. Again, these are firms
05:57who always had pro bono programs, right? The point of a pro bono program is to provide legal representation
06:07to people who can't afford it. Yeah. And, and, and, and above all, to try to focus on those who see
06:13whose access to justice is particularly, uh, critically in jeopardy, right? Uh, and again,
06:22never before, uh, uh, you know, in modern history has any president, uh, then try to simply, uh,
06:30turn pro bono into, uh, an arm of his own power. This is completely unprecedented as well. It
06:39entirely kills the spirit of pro bono. And, uh, you know, where, how much you want to blame
06:45these law firms, you know, uh, you know, whether they were in a corner, whether they could have
06:50acted differently, that's its own debate. One thing is sure it's depressing. It's sad. It's more sad news
06:58for democracy. And we're getting it every day now from the Trump administration.
07:02Yeah. And wondering if you're also getting it where you are, Donald Trump, just wrapping up his
07:06state visit to Britain. One of the things he suggested to Keir Starmer was that he could use
07:10a military to stop illegal immigration. Just curious if you think that sort of, uh, attempt to expand
07:19powers and do things that might be controversial in other times, how far that spreads beyond America's
07:24borders? Yeah. Well, I mean, one of the things I've been glad to see
07:28in Britain, again, you know, in Britain, as in other democracies, you'll find people who feel,
07:35uh, inspired or supported or empowered by Trumpism. But I was very glad to see that in
07:43Britain, overwhelmingly, again, even among many conservatives, you know, they see right through
07:48his game. They three, they see through the manipulation. Uh, they don't think that he has
07:53any competence to be telling Britain or any other democracy what to do. Quite the contrary. I mean,
08:00right, we've seen this on free speech, not only Trump. Again, I have to insist this is not only
08:05Trump, right? A movement like this is never just one person. And, you know, we get the same nonsense
08:11with J.D. Vance, right? Who, uh, you know, who, uh, uh, uh, uh, on several occasions, um, you know,
08:19has, uh, has chastised Britain for free speech while almost in the same breath singing the praises
08:25of Victor Orban, right? While being part of an administration which is cracking down on free speech
08:32every day. And, and we in Britain do know this. And we do see it. Eric, I want to thank you for
08:38your time. Thank you very much for your time. Eric Hines, a law professor joining us from London.
08:43Thank you. Thank you very much.
Comments