Attorney General Josh Kaul on Suing the Trump Administration

Zac Schultz:
Governor Tony Evers announced this week Wisconsin has joined another multi-state lawsuit against the Trump administration. This time suing the Department of Transportation over its decision to block the release of $60 million in federal funds that would support electric vehicle infrastructure around the state. Behind each lawsuit is Wisconsin’s Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul who joins us now. Thanks for being here.

Josh Kaul:
Thanks for having me.

Zac Schultz:
So this makes 15 lawsuits, by our count, in which the state is suing the federal government over issues like job cuts, policy changes and federal funding the Trump administration won’t release, as in this case. Why is it that the state attorneys general are the ones taking the lead when it comes to battling some of these executive orders out of the Trump administration?

Josh Kaul:
Well, the basic reason is that a lot of what the Trump administration is doing is flouting the law, and that means going to court and getting accountability. I look at two basic things in deciding whether Wisconsin should get involved in a multi-state suit. One is, is there a policy that’s harmful to Wisconsinites? So cutting over $60 million in funds that should be coming to Wisconsin and undermining our clean energy efforts, which is bad for the environment and also bad for jobs in Wisconsin, that’s harmful to Wisconsinites. And then secondly, is there a sound legal basis for challenging the policy? And here, this is a law that was passed by Congress and signed into law by the president at the time, the bipartisan infrastructure law. And Donald Trump doesn’t get to overrule that by fiat. That’s not how our constitutional republic works. So I believe we have a sound legal basis for challenging this. And so in this case, as well as the others, those two factors are met. And so we’ve gone to court to seek relief on behalf of the people of the state.

Zac Schultz:
In some of these cases you’re asking a federal court to block an executive order to prevent something like job cuts from happening. In other cases, you’re asking for them to do something, as in release funds.

Josh Kaul:
When it comes to the disbursement of some of these funds, there are processes in place. There’s a lot of work and planning that’s been done. And the Trump administration has come in and essentially told appointees to stop following the law and not do what you’re required to do under the law. We’re going to exercise our own policy judgment. And that’s, again, that’s just not how our system of government works. If we had a king who could act by fiat, that’s how it would work. But we have a system of laws, and the president’s duty under the Constitution is to faithfully execute those laws. So what we’re getting — what we’re requesting is that he be blocked from intervening and stopping the laws from being complied with.

Zac Schultz:
So victory in any of these cases applies to the entire United States. So why is it important for Wisconsin specifically to be involved?

Josh Kaul:
Well, actually, it doesn’t necessarily apply nationwide. It depends on the case. In some of these cases, we seek nationwide injunction. So orders that block policies across the country. But in some cases, either we only seek relief in the particular states involved or the judge decides to only issue relief in those states. So, for example, in the case involving the freeze on federal funding, which would have caused catastrophic effects nationwide if it had gone into effect. Right now, the order in place in that case only applies in the plaintiff states. So because Wisconsin was involved, were one of the states that benefits. Now, in addition to that, it’s also important that Wisconsin’s perspective is heard in these cases. If we are not one of the parties to this case, the Wisconsin perspective doesn’t get heard by the court.

Zac Schultz:
So the majority of the states that have signed onto these lawsuits are blue states, or in Wisconsin’s case, a purple state with, you know, Democrats in charge of the administration. Are there Republican AGs that are involved in these? Do you shop this out to red states to see if they’ll sign on?

Josh Kaul:
Well, so far, these multi-state cases against the Trump administration have been all Democratic AGs. And that’s disappointing because in some of these cases, the Trump administration is so clearly flouting the law or the Constitution. I’ll give you a simple example. One of the policy changes we’ve challenged relates to birthright citizenship. And birthright citizenship is literally written into the Constitution. There’s U.S. Supreme Court precedent directly on point. There’s federal law on point. And yet Republican AGs haven’t been willing to join us in fighting back against this. And it’s harmful potentially to their states. As we talked about, some of these orders only apply in the states that are involved. So some states may be left without funds because their AGs didn’t get involved. So it’s my hope that we will see Republicans get more engaged. But so far, both in Congress and in the AGs ranks, Republicans have been unwilling to stand up to Donald Trump and his lawlessness. And it’s critical for the republic that they get involved in this effort to protect our Constitution and protect the rule of law.

Zac Schultz:
We’ve seen Donald Trump try to influence federal judges in the past, threatening impeachment or questioning their independence. Does that matter once you’re in the courtroom arguing the case?

Josh Kaul:
Well, I think it doesn’t matter from the standpoint of our judge is going to be independent and do the right thing. I think we’ve seen them doing that. They’ve been applying the law, and that’s why you see the judiciary, unlike Congress, for example, where judges appointed by Republicans as well as judges appointed by Democrats have pushed back. But where it does matter is that, you know, our constitutional system relies on people respecting the fact that we have co-equal branches and that there is separation of powers. We all need to be involved in protecting our Constitution.

Zac Schultz:
Switching to state politics and the budget. What are the prospects for what you’re asking for for the Department of Justice?

Josh Kaul:
You know, I’m hopeful. We are asking for investments that will help make our communities in Wisconsin safer. We’ve asked for additional funding for victim service programs around the state, because there’s been a significant decrease in federal funding, and we’ve seen some positive feedback from Republicans on that. We’ve asked for continuation of the work being done by the Office of School Safety. And again, that’s received bipartisan support. And the crime labs are a critical component of the criminal justice system in this state. And so making sure that we continue to invest in the labs so that we continue to stay on the cutting edge of technology and continue to be able to test evidence efficiently, is important. So, of course, we don’t know how the process will play out yet. But given that these are public safety investments, I’m hopeful that there will be bipartisan support for what we’ve asked for.

Zac Schultz:
All right. Attorney General Josh Kaul, thanks for your time today.

Josh Kaul:
Thanks for having me.