Scripps News: Legal Implications of Trump Audio Tape: Andrew Lieb Analyzes the Case

Attorney Andrew Lieb joins Scripps News to provide a comprehensive analysis on the legal implications of a recently surfaced audio tape involving former President Trump. The tape suggests potential violations of federal law, as it indicates the showing of a classified document to an individual without proper clearance. Lieb offers insights into the significance of the recording, potential defense strategies, and the challenges associated with securing convictions in high-profile cases. 

Key quotes from Attorney Andrew Lieb:

•  "The thing is, we read about in the indictment itself recordings and it wasn't as bad as even this recording from Bedminster. And I would bet everything I own that Jack Smith has a lot more than just this recording."
• "Trump not only pays to get the evidence taken against him, then he goes on truth social and gives us a play by play commentary when it comes out. It couldn't get better for a prosecutor than this."
• "The laws you just played the recording dealt, but what they're going to do is they're going to say, 'But you don't believe that we don't need to believe that he wouldn't do that.'"
• "The big hurdle is he's a very popular fella, and can you get enough jurors to want to convict them? But that's not saying does Jack Smith have the law and the facts Jack Smith has the law on the facts, though."
• "At the end of the day, it's really hard to get around a recording of yourself that you paid for admitting that something was still secret top secret, and you were showing it to someone else. That's a problem."
• "If I was Trump's lawyers today, I would be taking Valium after Valium and just say, 'Please turn off your social media man.' He's killing them."
• 
  

Scripps News: Supreme Court Allows Biden Administration to Limit Immigration Arrests. Analysis w/ Attorney Andrew Lieb

In a recent interview with Scripps News, Attorney Andrew Lieb provided insights into the Supreme Court's decision to allow the Biden administration to prioritize immigration arrests. Lieb's analysis shed light on the factors influencing the liberal and conservative justices' perspectives, the implications for the states involved, and the broader constitutional considerations arising from the ruling.

Two Approaches to Decision-Making: Lieb noted that the liberal justices likely based their decision on a broader consideration of immigration policy as a whole. Conversely, the conservative justices focused on history and tradition, drawing parallels to previous cases like Dobbs v. Jackson that overturned Roe v. Wade. This dichotomy highlighted how different groups of people can arrive at the same conclusion through distinct approaches.

Standing and State Involvement: Lieb explained that the ruling determined that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing on the issue at hand. This ruling does not indicate support for President Biden's policy or establish the executive branch's ultimate authority. Instead, it signifies that these particular states cannot present their arguments in this specific case.

Implications on a Personal Level: Lieb highlighted that not everyone can realistically be subject to deportation due to limited governmental resources and prioritization. The ruling allows the Biden administration greater flexibility in implementing its immigration policies.

Constitutional Considerations: Lieb underscored the importance of historical perspectives and past interpretations in cases brought before the conservative-leaning Supreme Court. He emphasized that a deeper understanding of history is crucial when presenting a case to this particular Court.

Tightened Rules for State Challenges: The ruling against the states by SCOTUS has resulted in tightened rules concerning when states may challenge federal policies they disagree with. This development clarifies the parameters for state involvement in legal challenges to federal decisions.

Analyzing the Legal Implications of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

The U.S. employment law landscape has been transformed with the implementation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). This law, endorsed by President Joe Biden, extends protections to employees dealing with pregnancy, childbirth, or related conditions. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) will now begin processing discrimination charges under this fresh statute, opening a new chapter in labor rights.

Legal Provisions:

The PWFA mandates employers to provide reasonable accommodations for pregnancy, childbirth, or related conditions, except when these adjustments impose an undue hardship on the employer. The PWFA thus augments protections under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. As EEOC Chair Charlotte A. Burrows stated, the PWFA aids workers in securing their entitlements under this new law.

EEOC's Role and Resources:

The EEOC has introduced educational materials to aid workers and employers in understanding the new law. These include a "Know Your Rights" video series, a revised poster, and a guide to the PWFA. The EEOC is also set to accept discrimination charges under PWFA.

The Bottom Line:

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act fills a gap in employment rights, fostering a more equitable and inclusive working environment. It is a substantial step towards legally addressing the unique challenges faced by pregnant workers, fostering a fair workspace for all.

If you are a victim, you can bring a discrimination case and recovery monetary damages for your lost pay and emotional distress. You have rights. 

5th Cir Decision that Religion Lets Businesses Discriminate Against LGBTQ Employees Welcomes SCOTUS

 Attention SCOTUS, America needs you. 

On June 20, 2023, the 5th Cir undercut Title VII's promise to be free from employment discrimination in Bear Creek Bible Church v. EEOC, et at. 

The employer here, Bear Creek Bible Church, "is a nondenominational church" that "does not permit Braidwood to employ individuals who engage in behavior he considers sexually immoral or gender non-conforming, nor does he allow Braidwood to recognize homosexual marriage."

Bear Creek sued the EEOC asserting "that Title VII, as interpreted in the EEOC’s guidance and Bostock, prevents them from operating their places of employment in a way compatible with their Christian beliefs."

The 5th Cir held that "Title VII post-Bostock would substantially burden its ability to operate per its religious beliefs about homosexual and transgender conduct."

However, the 5th Cir called for SCOTUS by writing - "Although the Supreme Court may some day determine that preventing commercial businesses from discriminating on factors specific to sexual orientation or gender identity is such a compelling government interest that it overrides religious liberty in all cases, it has never so far held that."

Oh SCOTUS, what say you? 

FOX LiveNOW: Attorney Andrew Lieb Shares Key Insights on Hunter Biden Case and Trump's Trial

Political Commentator and Legal Analyst Attorney Andrew Lieb recently shared his analysis and insights on the Hunter Biden case and former President Donald Trump's trial during an exclusive interview on LiveNOW from FOX. 

Hunter Biden Case:

• Investigation and Charges: The investigation into Hunter Biden's case spanned four to five years before specific charges were brought forward. Charges include felony gun charges and two misdemeanors related to unpaid taxes in 2017-2018. 
• Cooperation and Plea Deal: Lieb emphasizes the importance of cooperation with prosecutors to achieve a favorable plea deal when facing potential exposure. Cooperation before formal charges are brought can lead to more favorable outcomes.
• Potential Penalties: Lieb expresses doubt regarding the likelihood of jail time for Hunter Biden. The felony firearm charge is to be addressed through a pretrial diversion program focused on rehabilitation rather than punitive measures. Hunter Biden has already paid back taxes and penalties, reducing the possibility of incarceration by the Judge where the prosecutors are said not to be seeking jail time.

Former President Trump's Trial:

• Trial Date and Venue: Tentative trial date set for August 14, although delays due to motions and discovery are expected. The trial will take place in Fort Pierce, Florida, a location considered more favorable for Trump compared to Miami. Lieb explains the significance of trial venue and its potential impact on the proceedings.

Congressman George Santos' Case:

• Judge denies Santos' attempt to keep bond backers' identities sealed. The order mandates unsealing of identities on June 22 at 12 pm, allowing Santos or bond suretors the opportunity to modify the release to incarceration before the disclosure. Lieb questions if Santo's family-member suretors are actually even family members given Santos' track record for the truth. 

CBS: Supreme Court Ponders Student Loan Debt & College Admissions. Analysis With Attorney Andrew Lieb.

SCOTUS considers striking down affirmative action, we may find ourselves on a slippery slope. Are we edging towards ignoring student's backgrounds in college admissions, perhaps even disregarding admission letters altogether? Remember, nine states already don't factor in race for university admissions. Attorney Andrew Lieb's analysis with @CBSNewYork

CBS Radio: Donald Trump's Legal Quagmire: An Interview with Attorney Andrew Lieb

On June 14th, 2023, marking the 77th birthday of Donald Trump, CBS Radio hosted an enlightening discussion with legal analyst and attorney Andrew Lieb. The interview revolved around the former president's current legal situation following his recent arraignment and pre-birthday celebration in Bedminster.

In this deep-dive conversation, Lieb shared intriguing insights into Trump's defense strategy, potential repercussions, and the challenging path ahead for his legal team.

Trump's Defense Strategy: The 'What About Isms':

Lieb noted that Trump's defense seemed to hinge heavily on 'what about isms.' This is a tactic where the accused attempts to deflect blame by bringing attention to similar offenses committed by others. In Trump's case, the targets of his 'what about isms' are often Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. 

However, Lieb was quick to point out the ineffectiveness of this strategy in a court of law. The legal focus is solely on the individual on trial—in this instance, Trump—not anyone else. Thus, accusations directed towards Clinton, Biden, or others would be deemed irrelevant.

Trump's Legal Defense: A Game of Suppression:

According to Lieb, the defense's primary task should be to ascertain whether any evidence has been obtained illegally. If that's the case, their efforts should be directed towards suppressing such evidence. This approach takes precedence over simply trying to prove innocence. It's all about making it difficult for the prosecutor to prove guilt, rather than making it easy for the defense to prove innocence.

The Double-Edged Sword of Public Statements:

Lieb had some advice for Trump: stop talking about the case, especially on the campaign trail. As a legal professional, he believes any public discourse about the case could potentially be used against Trump in court. However, he recognized the potential political benefits of such communication, as playing the victim might appeal to Trump's base of supporters.

The Outlook: A High Likelihood of Jail Time?

In a somewhat startling revelation, Lieb expressed a belief that, based on the current state of affairs, Trump is likely to face jail time. He made it clear that this prediction doesn't factor in any potential actions the defense team could take, such as suppressing evidence or getting charges dismissed.

Further, Lieb noted that this is just the beginning. Besides the present case, there's a possibility of Trump facing additional charges in Georgia, and at the federal level in NJ—especially related to the sharing of classified documents, and in DC.

Scripps News: Analyzing Trump's Defense Strategy: Insights from Attorney Andrew Lieb

Attorney Andrew Lieb recently shared key insights on Scripps News on former President Trump's defense strategy following his arraignment. Lieb's analysis sheds light on important arguments and potential challenges that may arise in the case. Let's explore the crucial points discussed during the interview.

1. Selective Prosecution and Relevancy:

Lieb notes that Trump's references to other investigations, such as those involving Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, may hold political weight but lack the relevancy required to be heard in a courtroom. Selective prosecution may be raised as a defense, but its success remains unlikely.

2. Fourth Amendment and Unreasonable Search and Seizures:

Trump's defense may challenge the legality of the FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago home, arguing violations of the Fourth Amendment. However, Lieb suggests the experienced prosecution team is unlikely to have made critical mistakes in obtaining the subpoena.

3. Personal vs. Official Records:

Trump's claim to distinguish personal and official records presents an intriguing argument because of the Clinton Sock Drawer Case. However, legal precedent from the Court of Appeals limits a president's authority in determining record categorization under the Presidential Records Act. This argument may face challenges and potential appeals.

4. Motions, Appeals, and Bond Conditions:

Lieb outlines three expected motions: discovery of evidence, suppression based on Fourth Amendment violations, and dismissal based on record categorization as personal. Appeals are likely to complicate the case further. Violating bond conditions, including communicating with witnesses, may result in consequences for Trump's bond.

Scripps News: Lieb's Legal Outlook on Trump's Indictment Case: Key Takeaways

Attorney Andrew Lieb recently delivered a comprehensive legal interpretation during his appearance on Scripps News, offering deep insights into the indictment case against former President Trump. Here are the key takeaways from his commentary:

The Importance of Discovery:

According to Lieb, the stage of litigation following arraignment will be an approximate year-long discovery. Discovery is an information exchange process where the defense counsel has the right to view what the evidence supporting the prosecutor's case, allowing them to prepare their defense based on the evidence at hand.

Anticipated Motions: 

In the context of this case, Lieb predicts a series of motions to suppress and dismiss the evidence presented by the prosecutors. This process of challenging the evidence is critical for the defense in ensuring any evidence used in the trial is obtained properly and is relevant.

Role of the Defense Team:

Lieb believes the defense team's immediate task should be to take charge of the case, turning it from a political show into a serious criminal defense case. This involves ensuring their client refrains from making potentially damaging public speeches and focusing on evaluating the evidence at hand.

Fourth Amendment Implications:

Lieb noted that improper acquisition of evidence could lead to motions for suppression based on Fourth Amendment rights, which protect against unreasonable searches and seizures. This approach could potentially impact what evidence is deemed admissible in the trial.

Implications for Future Proceedings:

As the case unfolds, Lieb anticipates many of the decisions made by the judge to be appealed to the 11th circuit, which may set precedent for future high-profile cases.

FOX LiveNOW: Andrew Lieb Sheds Light on Trump’s Federal Arraignment: An Overview

In a recent interview with LiveNow from Fox, Andrew Lieb, an attorney at Lieb at Law, offered insight into former President Donald Trump's federal arraignment. The case at hand revolves around accusations that Trump misused classified documents and obstructed justice.

Lieb explained that the investigation was being led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland. The probe's scope includes an examination of Trump's handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate and the events of January 6th. However, the current arraignment focuses solely on the former.

While the investigation began under Judge Canon, the arraignment itself will be overseen by Magistrate Judge Goodman. The chief contention is what Trump did with classified documents after leaving office, including his alleged obstruction of returning these documents and the potential violation of the Espionage Act.

Trump reportedly paid someone to record conversations in which he acknowledged the classified status of certain documents. This revelation is a significant component of the indictment. The maximum penalty for these charges amounts to 400 years, although Lieb was clear to specify that this is a theoretical maximum, not a sentencing guideline.

The arraignment process was outlined as a relatively straightforward procedure. It typically involves the entry of a plea, and in Trump's case, the expectation is a plea of not guilty. However, the process of capturing images and video will be heavily restricted within federal court, and there will be no mug shots due to perceived security risks.

Moving forward, Lieb anticipates Trump will face trial, and given federal prosecutors' historically high conviction rates, he sees it likely that the former President could face prison time. It’s also worth noting that this arraignment is only one part of several potential legal issues for Trump, with potential grand jury proceedings in DC and investigations in Georgia yet to play out.

Addressing the crowds gathered outside the courthouse, Lieb expressed hopes for peaceful protests. He reiterated that it's essential for the judiciary to run its course without violent interruption, regardless of public opinion. He pointed out that Trump would have a jury largely composed of his peers in Florida, a state with a Republican majority.