Up First from NPR - Fake Electors, Trump's Legal Battles, Asylum Rule Challenge

Episode Date: July 19, 2023

Michigan's attorney general has announced charges against 16 people who served as fake electors following the 2020 election. Former President Trump says he's been notified that he's a target in the special counsel's investigation of the January 6 insurrection. And President Biden's immigration policy on asylum seekers is challenged in court.Want more comprehensive analysis of the most important news of the day, plus a little fun? Subscribe to the Up First newsletter.Up First is produced by Nina Kravinsky and Shelby Hawkins. Our editors are Reena Advani, Catherine Laidlaw, Russell Lewis, Denice Rios and Alice Woelfle. Our technical director is Zac Coleman with engineering support from Stacey Abbott.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

In Michigan, 16 fake electors tried to turn the 2020 elections in Donald Trump's favor. Now they face criminal charges. They weren't the duly elected and qualified electors, and each of the defendants knew it. I'm E. Martinez with Leila Fadl, and this is Up First from NPR News. The former president's legal woes keep piling up. First, Trump was indicted in March, then again in June, and now maybe a third indictment, this one in connection with the attack on the Capitol. Trump says he got a letter that called him a target of the special counsel's January 6 investigation.

And at the southern border, fewer people are getting across illegally. Biden's administration credits restrictive asylum policies, but both immigrant advocates and immigration hawks say those policies are illegal. That's the focus of a court hearing today. Stay with us. We'll give you the news you need to start your day. Now Our Change will honor 100 years of the Royal Canadian Air Force and their dedicated service to communities at home and abroad. From the skies to our change, this $2 commemorative circulation coin marks their storied past and promising future. Find the limited edition Royal Canadian Air Force $2 coin today. Now we know Donald Trump may face federal charges for efforts to overturn the 2020 election,

but there are now related charges in Michigan. Yesterday, the Democratic state attorney general announced charges against 16 fake electors. These were people who submitted paperwork to the federal government, falsely saying that they were Michigan's true electors and that Donald Trump won the state, even though he clearly lost Michigan in 2020. To talk about all this, we have Colin Jackson of the Michigan Public Radio Network. Good morning, Colin. Good morning. So what do we know about these charges? Well, there are 16 defendants total. They each face eight felony charges that mostly have to

do with forgery. And as you mentioned, they stem from this moment in December of 2020, when Attorney General Dana Nessel said the 16 defendants gathered in the basement of what was then the Republican Party headquarters. They allegedly signed a memo falsely stating that they were Michigan's official Electoral College members when they were not and tried to award Michigan's Electoral College votes to former President Donald Trump, even though he lost the state handily. A group tried to drop that memo off at the state though he lost the state handily. A group tried to drop that memo off at the state capitol, where the state's real electors were gathering, but they were turned away. But despite that, Nessel says they did still transmit that memo

to the National Archives and former Vice President Mike Pence, hoping he'd overturn the election results. Here's Nessel, a Democrat, discussing it yesterday. Undoubtedly, there will be those who claim these charges are political in nature. But where there is overwhelming evidence of guilt in respect to multiple crimes, the most political act I could engage in as a prosecutor would be to take no action at all. What do we know about the people charged? They range in age from 55 to 82. The name that jumped out immediately to me was Michonne Maddock. She's a prominent Trump ally and until recently was the Michigan Republican Party co-chair. Her husband is a current Republican state representative who's part of our House Freedom

Caucus. I want to note he was not charged or mentioned anywhere in the AG's announcement. But there are also a few elected officials on the list. Those include a West Michigan city mayor named Kent Vanderwood, a Metro Detroit suburb clerk named Stan Grote. In Michigan, local clerks actually help administer elections. This just happened yesterday. So, so far, I haven't seen much reaction yet, though. To the charges, so that may be coming. Now, Michigan isn't the only place where there were fake electors. This happened in several other swing states where there are also investigations. But if you, Colin, could just put Michigan in a national context when it comes to efforts to overturn a legitimate election in the U.S. in 2020.

Michigan was one of the centerpieces of the so-called Stop the Steal movement. After it became apparent, Trump lost to President Biden by more than 150,000 votes. We saw Trump's attorneys and allies kind of flood the courts with lawsuits trying to overturn the results. You may remember the nickname given to them, the Kraken. Each of those challenges were thrown out, though. Election denialism, though, has taken hold in the Republican Party institution here. We've seen party leadership largely be at the forefront of wrongly claiming Trump won. We've also seen infighting continue as it relates to that. So what should we expect next now for the 16 people charged in the fake elector plot?

For those charged now, there hasn't been a date set yet for their arraignment, but Attorney General Nessel does say more people could be charged. So these are the first charges we've seen of this kind. We'll see if other states follow suit. That's Colin Jackson of the Michigan Public Radio Network. Colin, thank you. Thank you. Former President Donald Trump's legal problems keep getting bigger. On Tuesday, he revealed he's been notified he's a target in special counsel Jack Smith's investigation of the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol. There are questions about whether this could lead to a third indictment for Trump. And yesterday, Trump's lawyers were in court in Fort Pierce, Florida on his second indictment.

They asked a federal judge to delay his trial on charges of withholding and concealing classified documents until after next year's presidential election. Federal prosecutors want the trial to start in December. NPR's Greg Allen joins us now from Fort Pierce. Hi, Greg. Hi, Laila. Okay, so before we get to what's going on in Florida, let's talk about what Trump is calling a target letter. Does this mean he'll be indicted again, a third indictment, and face more felony charges? It does look like a strong possibility.

Trump posted this on his website, Truth Social, yesterday. He said he received word Sunday he's a target in the investigation that he has four days to appear before the grand jury. The grand jury has been meeting in Washington for some time as part of a special counsel Jack Smith's January 6th investigation. But target letters like that, especially for someone like a former president, suggest an indictment will soon follow on what charges are, it's not clear yet, but legal observers say they could include obstructing a legal proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the government. All this suggests could be the most serious case yet against the former president. Okay, so you were in court yesterday for a different case where Trump has been indicted. He's charged with willfully withholding and

concealing classified documents. What do we know about when that trial will start? Well, that is the question right now. Lawyers for the former president told U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon they believe the case should be delayed until next year after the presidential election. That's more than a year from now. They have numerous reasons for that they laid out. Among them, and one that seemed to carry some weight with the judge, is the sheer volume of material that defense lawyers will have to go through. They say they have more than 190,000 emails, 450 gigabytes of data, and more than 1,100 days of surveillance camera footage to go through. They also say that this fits the legal definition of a complex case, which merits a more extended trial schedule.

A Trump lawyer, Todd Blanch, told the judge that as a former president and one who's now running again for the nation's highest office, he deserves special consideration. Blanch said, it is intellectually dishonest to stand up in front of this court and say this case is like any other. It is not. How do prosecutors react to that? Well, they certainly reject that argument. Prosecutor David Harbaugh told the judge, Mr. Trump is not the president. He's a private citizen indicted by a grand jury. Harbaugh also rejected an assertion by Trump's lawyers that all the publicity and press coverage surrounding it is another reason to delay the trial. He told the judge that all the publicity surrounding Trump is, quote, chronic and almost permanent. Prosecutors want to start

the trial in less than five months on December 11th, and lawyers for Trump and his aide, Walt Nauta, who's also indicted in the case, say they can't possibly be ready by then. They told the judge they can't even begin to discuss a possible trial schedule until sometime in November. Any hints from the judge on how she might rule on the start date of the trial? It's what everybody's trying to figure out. Judge Cannon is a Trump appointee, and you may recall that she received a legal rebuke last year from a federal appeals court that struck down a ruling she made that was favorable to Trump. This was in an earlier hearing regarding these classified documents. Up to now, she's been pushing for a speedy trial. She seemed to take note yesterday of the large amount of material that Trump and now his lawyers have to go through, but she also seemed frustrated

by their argument that they can't begin to discuss a schedule now. So she said she'll issue an order soon on an appropriate schedule. NPR's Greg Allen in Fort Pierce, Florida. Thanks, Greg. You're welcome. The number of people crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally has dropped to the lowest level in more than two years. That's partly because the Biden administration limited how many people are granted access to the country who are seeking asylum. But immigrant advocates and immigration hawks alike say the administration's border policies are unlawful. And there's a court hearing today challenging the new asylum rules. NPR's Joel Rose has been following all this and joins me now. Good morning, Joel.

Hey, Layla. Okay, so remind us what these new rules are. Yeah, these rules took effect about two months ago in May, right after the end of the pandemic restrictions. You may remember that we're known as Title 42. Under the new rules, there is one main legal pathway for seeking asylum if you're already at the border. It's a mobile app called CBP One, and migrants can use it to make appointments for interviews at the ports of entry, which is basically the first step toward asking for asylum and being released into the U.S. Officials say there are roughly 40,000 appointments per month

available border-wide, but if you cross the border illegally without using the app, it is much harder to get asylum. The Biden administration is calling these common sense limits on asylum. And it says there are a big reason why these illegal border crossing numbers are down so dramatically. So what does this all mean for people who want to seek asylum? It means a lot of waiting for those appointments. I was in Nogales, Mexico a few weeks ago, where I met a migrant named Lise, who had been waiting a month watching other migrants get appointments through the app, and she said it didn't feel good. I feel bad because I'm alone, she says. I feel vulnerable, sad, and overwhelmed being here alone.

I don't have anyone telling me it's going to be okay. Be patient. We will get an appointment to enter the U.S. Still, Lissé has decided it's better to wait for an appointment than to cross illegally. And I think a lot of other migrants are making a similar calculation. Roughly 100,000 migrants are waiting in camps in cities near the southern border, according to a U.S. government estimate. Okay, so the administration is opening up new pathways to asylum. Why don't immigrant advocates like these new rules? Well, they do like the CBP One app, but they say it can't be the only way to access asylum at the border because it is creating a major bottleneck, and people should be able to apply no matter how they cross the border onto U.S. soil. National

immigrant rights groups basically filed their lawsuit the moment the new rules took effect. Those advocates say that these rules are all but identical to a Trump administration policy. And they're going back now to the same federal judge in Oakland, California, who found Trump's policy illegal. They're asking him to block the Biden administration's rules as well. That judge is holding a hearing in the case today. Okay, so that's one side of the debate. But as we said, immigration hardliners who want more restrictions don't like these policies either. What's their issue?

Yeah, the Biden administration says the border crossing numbers are down, but immigration hardliners say that is just a shell game. They say the number of migrants crossing has not changed that dramatically, but that the administration is using the CBP One app to say that these migrants are crossing legally now. It's creating a so-called legal pathway, in their view, that Congress never intended. Republican-led states have several legal challenges of their own going that are still working their way through the courts. One of those is slated to go to trial in Texas in August. The White House insists it is on solid legal ground in all of these cases. But Homeland Security officials also acknowledge that, you know,

the legal fights over asylum are likely to continue unless Congress can come up with a more durable solution. I think the chances of that are not looking very good at the moment. NPR's Joel Rose, thanks. You're welcome. And that's a first for Wednesday, July 19th. I'm Leila Faldin. And I'm A. Martinez. Up First is produced by Nina Kravinsky and Shelby Hawkins.

Our editors are Reena Advani and Alice Wolfley. Our technical director is Zach Coleman, with engineering support from Stacey Abbott. And our executive producer is Erika Aguilar. Join us again tomorrow. And there's a simple way to explore the vast world of public radio shows and podcasts, NPR One. Hear news from the station in your community, stories from around the country and the world, and podcast suggestions based on what you like. Download NPR One at the App Store. Thank you.