Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
All this job stay president Obama's choice for labor secretary Tom Perez -- seems no closer to being confirmed for that position a senate panel approving -- nomination.
Nearly two months ago now but controversy.
Over his legal tactics of the Justice Department has left the nomination.
Stalled in the full senate the Wall Street Journal's Mary -- has been reporting on these legal tactics for years now -- -- -- -- what does it feel like -- -- And it it has it has good news -- you know no one paid attention to this story.
Until the IRS political harassment scandal have now it's coming and now it's a story because they say the same tactics were going on -- justice let's start with this nomination process he is literally stole where's it gonna go from here there's no.
Vote scheduled in large part because he still hasn't complied with the house subpoena this personal email account and why did the house subpoena his personal email account.
Because they think house investigate house investigatory committee thanks.
Curran was struck this legal quid pro quo with the city's Saint Paul -- -- to get a case remove the Supreme Court and we don't know.
Who he negotiated with why he was doing -- of the government you know accounts and also why.
His account differs very dramatically from other people that were involved -- gave testimony to congress so there -- a lot of questions.
That's why there's no vote yet so this could go on indefinitely something's gonna have to give -- father not have to hole eventually schedule a vote on the guy but I think what he sees the administration.
That you can't really thumb your nose.
At the house and the federal subpoena.
And expects to be you know later today the aspect of these through the east through the -- so it's very embarrassing -- -- about these legal tactics let's go back over this because you can get a little bit confusing but the disparate impact.
Explain to me what that is and how it actually works well the theory of disparate impacts says.
You could not intend to discriminate but if -- action results in.
Some group being discriminated -- and again this is the administration's theory what and you can be sued so.
press -- justice went out so big lenders and he says effectively.
You're not giving enough loans to certain minority groups.
Blacks and Hispanics.
So we're going to accuse you of racism.
If you don't want us to do that well you could pay us tens of millions of dollars and then we will not filed a lawsuit.
Then we injustice can take the money.
And basically give it to.
People who we wanna give it to to community groups and to others so this is what was going on -- justice but disparate impact is a theory.
That not just justices using PC consumer financial protection you're using it receiving Equal Employment Opportunity Commission -- -- the success in recent history.
Cases and we wherever -- dollars general BMW and a few others I believe were accused of essentially using criminal background checks that they say have met this is -- a disparate impact.
Threshold because essentially was affecting one group more than other.
-- well again this is the bureaucracy making up law it is perfectly legal for companies today.
To do criminal checks credit channels of course because if you're jewelry store you don't want somebody -- -- -- -- addictive thing convicted -- working for you.
Criminals are not what we call a protected class is but this isn't she in -- they can't discriminate because of race age right -- all those things but.
What the equal out -- employment opportunity commission is doing.
Is saying all know we don't like that.
Were going to try to make new law.
Through lawsuits and that's where you got B Anthony dollar is this headed towards the Supreme Court -- -- that is this is is the Supreme Court gonna take up this issue -- the Supreme Court has twice agreed to take up disparate impact.
Under what's called the fair housing acts -- how it relates to housing OK the first time mr.
Peres engineered to have that case pulled from the court.
Now there's a second case that the court has agreed to hear it's it's town in New Jersey Mount Holly New Jersey.
That case looks like it may be settled there's a third case out there.
So even if even if that second case gets polled two cases in a row.
-- -- this -- is not going away and actually the eventual eventually -- Supreme Court will have to clarify the law what do you think would happen and I think -- I think it's very clear that the administration.
Was afraid to let the Supreme Court here that Saint Paul case because they thought that they were gonna get an adverse ruling I think that tells you all you need to know.
And in the meantime his nomination just -- remains in limbo.
Do you think you'll get nominated eventually -- I think that eventually they will have to have a vote -- but I think it's important that the media numbers is trying to pay attention.
To -- bureaucracies that are trying to make up belongs tactics all right Mary kissel.
The wall street journal editorial -- thank you so -- of being hit we'll stay on it won't continue to follow the developments thank you -- thanks for me.
Filter by section