April 22, 2024 • 29 mins
Attorney Jeff Briggs comes back on the show to talk about the US Supreme Court hearing a case that could change how LA and California deal with homelessness. A doctor from the Harbor UCLA Medical Center was fired.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can if I am six forty you're listening to the
John Cobelt Podcast on the iHeartRadio app. We're on the
radio from one until four after four o'clock John Cobelt
Show on demand on the iHeart app. Oh, it's time
to start up the moistline machine. Huh, I forgot to
mention this today. Eight seven seven moist eighty six. Well,
whatever ever's aggregating you eight seven seven moist eighty six
(00:22):
or use the talkback feature on the iHeartRadio app. You
could also follow us online on social media at John
Cobelt Radio. Today was a big day at the Supreme
Court for cities and towns, especially in the western part
of the country governed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
(00:42):
They had two decisions in recent years which made it
difficult for some cities and towns to clear out homeless encampments,
saying that it was a cruel and unusual punishment to
consider homeless people to be committing crimes because they're camping
in public and you had to satisfy a number of
(01:04):
requirements if you were going to remove them. Well, finally,
these towns and cities were able to appeal these decisions
and it went to the US Supreme Court. Hearings were
held today by the justices and to talk about this,
we're going to talk with Jeff Briggs. Now you may
remember Jeff Briggs, co host of the show about what
(01:24):
was a week and a half ago and he was
the attorney who had the highest bid at Jeff Brunos
Caterina's club event and the prize, was co hosting the
show and we got so much, so much good response
from his appearans that you know, we said, you know,
we'll have him on whenever there's like an area in
law that he's got some something to say. He worked
(01:48):
with a group to force the city in county to
clear the encampments here in Los Angeles County, and on
behalf of those organizations, he filed Amica's reefs with the
Supreme Court on this particular case. The shorthand for the
cases is Boise and Grant's Pass Boise, Idaho, Grant's Pass, Oregon.
(02:09):
They're the two cities whose ordinances were taken to court.
Let's see what he thinks about today's hearing.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Jeff Briggs, Hey, John, glad to be back.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Why you're a star? I mean, I don't get the
kind of complimentary reaction that you do.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
Good Lord, well thanks, I just want you to know
I can't afford to pay for it again or I'll
have to be a chef Bruno spaghetti client myself.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
So well, this will be this will be a freebie.
You can just do it. You'll work for food here,
all right, So tell tell us, give us an overview
what those ordinances did and and and why the cities
had so much trouble working around them that they have
to go to the Supreme Court to try to get relief.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
So, in a nutshell, Grant, the city of Boise, he
had an ordinance that actually would allow people to be
sent to jail for camping in public. And in Grant
and the Court the Ninth Circuit said, you can't have
a criminal penalty for that as unless everybody, unless you
(03:16):
have a shelter bed or some kind of bed available
for every single homeless person, you can't enforce it with
criminal sanctions sending someone to jail. Then in Oregon, in
Grant's past, which is a small town in southern Oregon,
beautiful place by the way, they had a civil ordinance
(03:39):
that would prohibit sleeping in public spaces, but it was
punishable by a citation. Essentially, get a ticket. Now eventually,
if you've got multiple tickets, you could eventually face jail time.
And the Ninth Circuit extended the Boise case. We also
(04:00):
can't have civil penalties for forcing for trying to enforce
laws against public space camping and unless you've got a
shelter bed for every single homeless person that is out
there camping on the street. And that just proved what
we've seen the results because the Boise case was several
(04:22):
years ago and Grant's passed was a couple of years ago,
and of course since then we've seen a huge rise
in not just homelessness but encampments with multiple people camped
out in parks and other sidewalk streets and other public spaces.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
All right, so talk about the group you're with. You
wrote you wrote the Alliance, and I know I'm familiar
with that, but explain what that is because you have
been fighting this battling court locally with well, I certainly.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
Haven't haven't been alone in that. I don't want to
make that clear, but I've been helping out the alliance.
The LA Alliance for Civil Rights was an organization put
together mostly by business people saying we've got to do
something to actually force the city to take care of
the people who are on the street, rather than just
(05:15):
toddling them and allowing them to continue to be camping
out in public spaces. And in addition, I represent a
lot of business improvement districts around the city which are
very actively involved in helping provide extra security and extra cleaning,
extra trash removal, that kind of thing throughout the city.
(05:38):
Those are businesses or property owners who tax themselves an
extra amount beyond all the absorbitant taxes that are already paying,
but they get to control where the money goes, and
they set up these business improvement districts to then spend
the money on extra trash cauling, extra street cleaning, whatever
it takes to keep their areas clean and need for businesses.
(06:00):
So obviously they're tremendously impacted by the failure of cities
like Los Angeles to be able to do anything about
people who are setting up these large encampments. So that's
why I represented.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
So you filed briefs on their behalf with the Supreme
Court for the for this case.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
Right, they're called the Friends of the Court briefs, and
there were there's probably over one hundred that were filed
by you know, cities, counties, attorney generals all over the place,
all filed what they call amiecas briefs, Friends of the
Court brief to sort of give the court the opportunity
to hear information that is not immediately part of the
(06:40):
underlying record in the case that they're hearing.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Okay, why don't we pause for a second now that
we've set up the whole history of this, because I mean,
this history goes back quite a few years. When we
come back, I assume how were you able to track
the case this morning?
Speaker 2 (06:56):
I could you can log in and hear the oral argument?
You can at lifetime?
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Yeah, there's an audio stream, right yeah? Okay, all right, Well,
then talk about what you heard when we come back,
and tell us if any of the justices seem to
be favoring one side or the other. There We're going
to continue with Jeff Briggs, attorney, coming up about the
big Supreme Court case today, whether cities and towns can
control their public land or if they're still barred from
(07:24):
issuing any criminal or civil penalties to the homeless, and
who are in the encampments. That's next.
Speaker 3 (07:31):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
So today's the day the Supreme Court's going to hear
the case which helped cause a lot of mayhem in
the Western States, especially here in Los Angeles. And it
was the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals who decided that
it's cruel and unusual punishment, a violation of the Eighth
Amendment to issue criminal or civil penalties for sleeping and
(08:01):
camping in public spaces. And the two cases started in Boise,
Idaho and Grants Pass, Oregon, and today the appeal moved
to the Supreme Court. A lot of cities and towns
across the country, across this region the Ninth Circuit filed
complaints and briefs. Among them is Jeff Riggs and he
(08:26):
works with a local group trying to get the city
in county to clear the encounpments, and he filed a
Friend of the Court brief with the Supreme Court to
get these decisions overturned. Let's get Jeff Briggs on since
he listened to the Supreme Court hearing, they have an
audio feed. So Jeff, what did you hear what stood
out to you as both sides debated.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
Yeah, the first thing I just want to say is
that predicting what the Supreme Court is going to do
in a given case based on their questions and consider
oral arguments is about as accurate as putsatani phil. You know, people, uh,
people try to predict this stuff all the time, with
a lot of great success. You might have justices sometimes
(09:09):
who are just testing the waters with some of their
comments and questions. It doesn't necessarily reveal where their thinking is.
But since everybody else is going to do it, I'll
jump in and guess a little bit as well. I
think you have kind of an interest. It's going to
be very interesting. I'd love to be behind the scenes
to hear how these arguments play out. It's clear to
(09:30):
me that at least the three usual liberal justices Kagan, Sodamaiyoor,
and Jackson are perfectly fine with the Eighth Amendment being
used as it has been, and perfectly fine with the
Ninth Circuit decision, and so that is not likely to change.
(09:50):
There's also it seems pretty clear that that three of
the justices Gorsich, Alito, and Roberts are uh, not too
happy with the Ninth Circuit and would do not think
that the Eighth Amendment is the right vehicle for deciding
this particular issue. Essentially, uh with with the view that
(10:16):
that you're they're they're not punishing somebody's status as being homeless,
They're punishing the conduct that comes along with being homelessness,
which is camping and uh out in the street. But
there's also a few, including Justice Thomas. By the way,
this argument went two hours, and I believe every single
(10:38):
Justice asked the question or made a comment, including Thomas,
which is unusual, although he has been doing it more recently.
He and Barrett and potentially Kavanaugh seem to be hung
up a little bit on whether uh, the Eighth Amendment
(10:58):
should be used ahead of time, before somebody is arrested
or fined, in order to adjudicate whether their rights have
been violated. So here's what I mean by that. In
the Grants Pass case, and this is fairly underreported, but
one of the most serious problems with the Grants Pass
(11:20):
case is that they certified a class action. Now, when
you have a class action, that means that you're going
to you're saying all of these people who are in
the affected class. We're not going to individually adjudicate each
and every one of their cases. We're going to treat
them all as if they're exactly the same and if
(11:41):
and they can bring this as a class action, and
that puts it risk a city who gets something wrong,
that puts them on the hook for mass damages and
huge attorneyses. So the class action part of this is
(12:02):
that the eighth circuit was used in advance, before anybody
got arrested, before anybody got fined. These plaintiffs didn't face
any consequences. They just said ahead of time, we shouldn't
be subject to a citation or to an arrest. And
I think these three judges are saying no, I think
that until I think we're going to have to analyze
(12:23):
each of these each individual situation on a case by
case basis. So they're going to have to be arrested
or fined first, and then we'll look at the courts
can look at their individual situation and determine whether they
are being prosecuted or fined because they are involuntarily homeless
(12:46):
and have no bed, no other place to go, and
that would be a huge win for the cities if
they do that. Now, what's interesting about it is that
the three liberal justices who are going to see that
they're not going to win flat out on the eighth Amendment,
they will probably try to back that and and try
(13:08):
to have the court essentially punt on this. And so
we'll see what happens. But I don't, okay, So it's been.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
A punt okay. So so I mean if that happens
the way you laid it out, then then uh, cities
and towns would be able to remove these people, but they'd.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Be able to arrest and find them.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
Yeah, right, but that but but then the the the
homeless could go and seek some sort of appeal in court.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
On an individual basis by case, which which which not
everybody is going to do obviously, So be it. So
here as it stands right now, if I'm a city,
I can't just go out and say I'm going to
prohibit people from sleeping on the streets and I'll take
my chances in court, because as it stands right now,
the Eighth Amendment would allow somebody to file a lawsuit
(13:56):
before they've even been arrested, before their own circumstances have
been analyzed and looked at. It all and say you can't,
you can't have that ordinance. But and and they would
have to then refine and define their their their ordinance
in such a way that it would be almost impossible
to ever enforce if it goes the other way, and
(14:17):
the court says, we're going to analyze this on an
individual basis, case by case. Now, you they still have
the Eighth Amendment, it's still intact. And so if if
somebody is able to prove that they are completely they're
they're living and camping on the street because completely involuntarily.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
Right, they have no option.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
They got no option at all. No nothing's been offered
to them. They have no family, they have no place
else they can go. They have this is all they is,
truly no option. Then they still have an Eighth Amendment
defense in their particular case, but they have to go
and adjudicate that. And what's really going to this is
this is the misconception about all this and straw men
(15:00):
that the liberal side and the advocates for the homeless
are pushing here is that, well, the cities just want
to arrest and find people. They really don't. They just
want to use this that they want to have it
as a tool in their tool belt. They want to
be able to get help to the people who really
need and.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
Want and you need to have at least in the
background coercion in order to force people to have to
get the help. That has to be implied that look,
we're going to try to help you here, but if
you keep saying no over and over again, we can
go to be consequences.
Speaker 2 (15:37):
Exactly that's exactly right. And they don't they don't have
to jail space, they don't have the police time to
go out and start or just as arresting people. They're
not going to do that. They want to get the
people who really need help. They want to have some
aspect of coercion to be able to get them to
agree to do it or move along. And if you can,
(15:58):
if they have the ability to do that, if they
can go out and use that in that that tool
in the tool belt, that's going to take care of
a lot of people who really do need help. And
then it's going to be much harder for the vagrants
who are just there because they can be it's going
to make it harder for them to hide. And yeah, the.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Ones, the ones who moved to California because they heard
it's anything goes in the streets exactly, all right.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
And they're going to find out it doesn't any It's
not anything goes anymore.
Speaker 1 (16:28):
Jeff, thank you for coming on. I've got to do
the news. I really appreciate you laying out your analysis
of today's case.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
I hope it helps, and yeah, we'll keep our fingers crossed.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
All right. Jeff Briggs. And he's an attorney, and he
was among those who filed amicus briefs in the Supreme
Court case today regarding whether cities and towns in the
West can they force homeless out of the encampments.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI A six.
Speaker 1 (16:57):
I guess I'm going to put out a warning if
if you're sensitive, there's going to be some sexual discussion here,
not exactly sexual discussion, but body part analysis. Should I
go away? Oh no, you're going to want to stay
for this. You remember, we had we had some creepy
gynecologists at USC and U c l A. Yeah, that
(17:21):
had a long history of sexually abusing young college women. Also,
you had Larry Nasser, who not only was sexually abusing
members of the US Olympic gymnastics team. But he was
also what was that Michigan University of Michigan or Michigan State.
I forget which which one he worked at there, but
(17:42):
that was three prominent schools and the women's gymnastics team
hit by these these disgusting perverts disguised as gynecologists. Well,
we have another one of these characters, slightly different, but
there is the Harbor UCLA Medical Center. That's that's a
(18:02):
public hospital and one of its highest ranking doctors has
been fired. And his name is doctor Lewis Kwang, and
they said he would regularly gawk at the genitalia of
an esthetized patients. And in addition, he also had some
side corruption going on. He was getting paid by a
(18:24):
medical device company. He used those products on patients, didn't disclose.
But that's not that interesting. The interesting stuff is he
had a running commentary as he operated on on the patients.
He liked to look under the surgical covers of black
males who were under anesthesia and would discuss the genitals
(18:46):
of the day.
Speaker 4 (18:48):
The genitals of the genitals.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Of the day. I guess you know you have surgeons
have a number of patients on surgery day. Let's say
it's Wednesday, right, you know, you know you pread right Wednesday?
The ever available that they're in surgery, Well so you might,
I don't know, maybe three four five. And then whoever
the standout is gets the genitals of the day designation.
(19:11):
What kind of award do they get? Well, it's interesting
you say that. Kwang while he's doing surgery also discussed
his favorite sex positions and his preference for auto eerotic asphyxiation, which,
if you don't know, it's being choked or strangled during
sex to allegedly heighten the orgasm. I wouldn't know, Thanks
(19:37):
for sharing that. I don't hear you saying I wouldn't know.
Speaker 4 (19:40):
I wouldn't know.
Speaker 1 (19:41):
You wouldn't know, Okay, all right? He also would carry
a gun in the operating room. He's a volunteer deputy sheriff.
What well he would bring his gun in the operating room.
I mean, he's real gun. And that's not a euphemism
for do you think.
Speaker 4 (20:00):
Okay, so is somebody recording this or is he recording this?
Speaker 1 (20:04):
I don't know. This went on for a long time,
and eventually it took a lot of years to finally
get him to get him fired. He also would bring
a knife into the operating room and not the knife
that he would use for the surgery.
Speaker 4 (20:19):
And what did he do with that?
Speaker 1 (20:20):
It just it was on him. He had a gun
and a knife with him all the time.
Speaker 4 (20:23):
In case the patient woke up fought him.
Speaker 1 (20:30):
Turns out that Quang's secretary complained more than ten years
ago that Kwang would remark on the grooming of an
esthetized patient's puber care. This was going back to at
least twenty sixteen, but the hospital didn't start their investigation
until twenty twenty one, and when they then put him
(20:54):
on paid leave. All right, he's been on paid leave
since twenty twenty one, and they paid him more than
a million dollars without work. That's the county government. In
twenty twenty three, he did not work a single day
(21:15):
and he was the eighth highest paid county employee. Okay,
that's ridiculous, isn't it. I mean, I don't even know
what to say. There's nothing to say. The thing is,
all the county supervisors know about this, all the hospital
officials know about this, and nobody cares.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
You.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Harbor UCLA treats mostly poor patients and uninsured patients in
the South Bay. It's a teaching hospital and he's the
chairman of the orthopedics department. So he wasn't even working
on Genitalia. That was.
Speaker 4 (21:53):
I shouldn't be laughing, but of course he wasn't.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
You've been laughing at a lot of inappropriate Stay with
the show is inappropriate? Could you miss us when you
were in the middle of the Indian Ocean there you
don't get entertainment like this in the Maldives. No, No,
those people would be in prison Sometimes I think about
how what countries if we were working in we'd be
in prison.
Speaker 4 (22:14):
Oh, you would never be able to talk about this
on a.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
Dubairas Yes, that's right, you would be.
Speaker 3 (22:22):
In a lock.
Speaker 4 (22:24):
I would have to send you bailbon.
Speaker 1 (22:27):
I think they would take my head off anyway. He
said he created an unprofessional and toxic work environment. Yeah
you think. Let's say you've got a little more here.
According to Kwang's discharge notice, okay, this firing papers, three
people told investigators that he referred to black patients as BAP,
(22:50):
which stood for Black Angry Patients and uh, well, I
can't even read what this is. Let's let's just say
he engaged racial slurs and terrible stereotypes. But they said
he was fixated on the genitalia of patients. They had
an end of the year roast, and male genitalia were
(23:13):
shown at an annual end of the year event. So that's.
Speaker 4 (23:21):
So other people saw.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Yeah right, it was an end of the year roast.
This is all in the La Times. I'm not making
up a single word here, and it was, and he
used to comment that certain female residents liked it. On top,
a technician told the surgical team to check out and
an esthetize patient's penis because it was very large. Kwan
(23:45):
would discuss whether a patient was a grower or a shower.
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Wait, a grower or a shower. I don't even know
what that means. Maybe I'm ignorant because Eric's giving me
a weird look.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
But all some men are growers and some men are showers.
It is what it says, it is. That's exactly what
it is.
Speaker 4 (24:05):
Okay, I feel like I'm missing something, but okay, forget it.
You don't need to talk about it anymore.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
He would. He would also comment on the fat rolls
of female patients. What nice guy.
Speaker 4 (24:20):
Yeah, so but okay, I have an idea. Let's strip
this guy down and let's do a commentary on his
entire body.
Speaker 1 (24:31):
I want my million dollars, and that too, a million dollars.
That's up scene to not work. And they and they
knew about this. Uh, they knew about this for eight
years and he just got fired eight years. Here you go,
good work, all right.
Speaker 3 (24:52):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
This is one of those everyday stories. This is what
This is the real world consequences of having millions of
illegal aliens come over the border. Right, that seems so abstract,
it's just cold numbers. But what's the reality in certain
communities to have this huge influx of lawlessness. Well, East
(25:19):
Harlem High School soccer game public field, and it actually
was a travel team made of seventeen year old boys.
The teams called the Manhattan Kickers, and they showed up
at the soccer field and found that a group of
illegal aliens were already there and they weren't going to
leave the field. The coach, Eric Johnson said, I directly
(25:44):
asked them to leave, and some of them thought about it,
but then four or five of them said, you know fit,
we don't have to leave. We can do whatever we want.
There were forty team, forty boys from two teams. These
are legitimate teams made up of Americans, and they showed
up Sunday evening at Thomas Jefferson Park in East Harlem,
(26:07):
five o'clock match. It was the Kickers in fa Euro
New York for American kids, but on the field where
thirty men who appeared to be African migrants spoke little
English and they wouldn't leave to try to resolve the conflict.
The cops that showed up wanted to see a copy.
(26:31):
Wanted to see a copy of the club team's city permit.
He didn't ask the African migrants to show a permit,
but he asked the city team to show a permit.
They didn't have it on them because, as Johnson said,
(26:53):
when two teams show up in uniform with a referee
and two coaches, usually nobody is asking to see a permit.
And by time Johansson's assistant could forward a copy, the
game had been delayed thirty minutes, and by then the
two American teams didn't feel safe because Johnson said, even
when the game is over. You don't know if they're
waiting for you, So even if the cops kicked them out,
(27:17):
it may not be over. And they decided both teams
decided this is too dangerous. Parents told them they were
rattled by the incident and they don't want to play
at the field anymore. Of course, there aren't too many
available fields in East Harlem. Field space is limited, but
the migrants won that one. Police wouldn't enforce the law.
(27:39):
Nobody does conways here, We've got some heavy news today, John.
I know Monday is.
Speaker 5 (27:43):
Supposed to be light, but there's a shriff's deputy that's
been there's swarming a neighborhood in West Covina following a
shooting that apparently targeted a motorcycle deputy in the area,
so we'll talk about that. Also locking you out of
flint Ridge. A school is on lockdown because of a
lunatic there. So those are the two heavy stories. But
if you know it's today, there's not a lot of
(28:05):
people out on the road. I don't know what's going on.
I notice that I think it's a combination of Coachella,
Jewish Holiday, and I don't know it's spring.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
I don't know but there's nobody out of there, like
when you analyze the calendars. It's one of my favorite
parts of the show. But nobody's in the calendar effect trap.
Speaker 5 (28:28):
Although you know, maybe it's a post four to twenty
hangover to yesterday was for twenty? How'd you celebrate four twenty?
Wasn't aware of it? You didn't take a big ripper?
Speaker 1 (28:39):
I never do.
Speaker 5 (28:40):
No, you didn't break out Deborah Deborah Cobelt six foot
glass bong.
Speaker 1 (28:46):
Yeah, that's what we do at my house, sit around
the kitchen table, sucking on bond.
Speaker 5 (28:50):
You put her up on your shoulders and she gets
hits that six foot She loves that.
Speaker 1 (28:54):
Yeah, yeah, dragonfly, what'd you get push? You think I
know this stuff? I don't know.
Speaker 5 (29:01):
I Eric, you know all the weeds or are a crozier?
What are some of the popular weeds? White widow cush.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
So far, you're the only one who knows hard ty stick,
dime bag. Like you're doing pretty well there. Yeah, I lid.
You don't need any help from them seedless they still seedless.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (29:23):
This is what you do all day.
Speaker 5 (29:24):
Shake Mexican shake. Remember that weed when you're a kid
By dimebag of that back crap. I thought you can
get your buzzy, all right, so whatever, okay, thing, all right,
we're here.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
Crozier's got the news Why twenty four hour CAFI Newsroom. Hey,
you've been listening to The John Cobalt Show podcast. You
can always hear the show live on KFI AM six
forty from one to four pm every Monday through Friday,
and of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
Can if I am six forty you're listening to the
John Cobelt Podcast on the iHeartRadio app. We're on the
radio from one until four after four o'clock John Cobelt
Show on demand on the iHeart app. Oh, it's time
to start up the moistline machine. Huh, I forgot to
mention this today. Eight seven seven moist eighty six. Well,
whatever ever's aggregating you eight seven seven moist eighty six
(00:22):
or use the talkback feature on the iHeartRadio app. You
could also follow us online on social media at John
Cobelt Radio. Today was a big day at the Supreme
Court for cities and towns, especially in the western part
of the country governed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
(00:42):
They had two decisions in recent years which made it
difficult for some cities and towns to clear out homeless encampments,
saying that it was a cruel and unusual punishment to
consider homeless people to be committing crimes because they're camping
in public and you had to satisfy a number of
(01:04):
requirements if you were going to remove them. Well, finally,
these towns and cities were able to appeal these decisions
and it went to the US Supreme Court. Hearings were
held today by the justices and to talk about this,
we're going to talk with Jeff Briggs. Now you may
remember Jeff Briggs, co host of the show about what
(01:24):
was a week and a half ago and he was
the attorney who had the highest bid at Jeff Brunos
Caterina's club event and the prize, was co hosting the
show and we got so much, so much good response
from his appearans that you know, we said, you know,
we'll have him on whenever there's like an area in
law that he's got some something to say. He worked
(01:48):
with a group to force the city in county to
clear the encampments here in Los Angeles County, and on
behalf of those organizations, he filed Amica's reefs with the
Supreme Court on this particular case. The shorthand for the
cases is Boise and Grant's Pass Boise, Idaho, Grant's Pass, Oregon.
(02:09):
They're the two cities whose ordinances were taken to court.
Let's see what he thinks about today's hearing.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Jeff Briggs, Hey, John, glad to be back.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Why you're a star? I mean, I don't get the
kind of complimentary reaction that you do.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
Good Lord, well thanks, I just want you to know
I can't afford to pay for it again or I'll
have to be a chef Bruno spaghetti client myself.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
So well, this will be this will be a freebie.
You can just do it. You'll work for food here,
all right, So tell tell us, give us an overview
what those ordinances did and and and why the cities
had so much trouble working around them that they have
to go to the Supreme Court to try to get relief.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
So, in a nutshell, Grant, the city of Boise, he
had an ordinance that actually would allow people to be
sent to jail for camping in public. And in Grant
and the Court the Ninth Circuit said, you can't have
a criminal penalty for that as unless everybody, unless you
(03:16):
have a shelter bed or some kind of bed available
for every single homeless person, you can't enforce it with
criminal sanctions sending someone to jail. Then in Oregon, in
Grant's past, which is a small town in southern Oregon,
beautiful place by the way, they had a civil ordinance
(03:39):
that would prohibit sleeping in public spaces, but it was
punishable by a citation. Essentially, get a ticket. Now eventually,
if you've got multiple tickets, you could eventually face jail time.
And the Ninth Circuit extended the Boise case. We also
(04:00):
can't have civil penalties for forcing for trying to enforce
laws against public space camping and unless you've got a
shelter bed for every single homeless person that is out
there camping on the street. And that just proved what
we've seen the results because the Boise case was several
(04:22):
years ago and Grant's passed was a couple of years ago,
and of course since then we've seen a huge rise
in not just homelessness but encampments with multiple people camped
out in parks and other sidewalk streets and other public spaces.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
All right, so talk about the group you're with. You
wrote you wrote the Alliance, and I know I'm familiar
with that, but explain what that is because you have
been fighting this battling court locally with well, I certainly.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
Haven't haven't been alone in that. I don't want to
make that clear, but I've been helping out the alliance.
The LA Alliance for Civil Rights was an organization put
together mostly by business people saying we've got to do
something to actually force the city to take care of
the people who are on the street, rather than just
(05:15):
toddling them and allowing them to continue to be camping
out in public spaces. And in addition, I represent a
lot of business improvement districts around the city which are
very actively involved in helping provide extra security and extra cleaning,
extra trash removal, that kind of thing throughout the city.
(05:38):
Those are businesses or property owners who tax themselves an
extra amount beyond all the absorbitant taxes that are already paying,
but they get to control where the money goes, and
they set up these business improvement districts to then spend
the money on extra trash cauling, extra street cleaning, whatever
it takes to keep their areas clean and need for businesses.
(06:00):
So obviously they're tremendously impacted by the failure of cities
like Los Angeles to be able to do anything about
people who are setting up these large encampments. So that's
why I represented.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
So you filed briefs on their behalf with the Supreme
Court for the for this case.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
Right, they're called the Friends of the Court briefs, and
there were there's probably over one hundred that were filed
by you know, cities, counties, attorney generals all over the place,
all filed what they call amiecas briefs, Friends of the
Court brief to sort of give the court the opportunity
to hear information that is not immediately part of the
(06:40):
underlying record in the case that they're hearing.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Okay, why don't we pause for a second now that
we've set up the whole history of this, because I mean,
this history goes back quite a few years. When we
come back, I assume how were you able to track
the case this morning?
Speaker 2 (06:56):
I could you can log in and hear the oral argument?
You can at lifetime?
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Yeah, there's an audio stream, right yeah? Okay, all right, Well,
then talk about what you heard when we come back,
and tell us if any of the justices seem to
be favoring one side or the other. There We're going
to continue with Jeff Briggs, attorney, coming up about the
big Supreme Court case today, whether cities and towns can
control their public land or if they're still barred from
(07:24):
issuing any criminal or civil penalties to the homeless, and
who are in the encampments. That's next.
Speaker 3 (07:31):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
So today's the day the Supreme Court's going to hear
the case which helped cause a lot of mayhem in
the Western States, especially here in Los Angeles. And it
was the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals who decided that
it's cruel and unusual punishment, a violation of the Eighth
Amendment to issue criminal or civil penalties for sleeping and
(08:01):
camping in public spaces. And the two cases started in Boise,
Idaho and Grants Pass, Oregon, and today the appeal moved
to the Supreme Court. A lot of cities and towns
across the country, across this region the Ninth Circuit filed
complaints and briefs. Among them is Jeff Riggs and he
(08:26):
works with a local group trying to get the city
in county to clear the encounpments, and he filed a
Friend of the Court brief with the Supreme Court to
get these decisions overturned. Let's get Jeff Briggs on since
he listened to the Supreme Court hearing, they have an
audio feed. So Jeff, what did you hear what stood
out to you as both sides debated.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
Yeah, the first thing I just want to say is
that predicting what the Supreme Court is going to do
in a given case based on their questions and consider
oral arguments is about as accurate as putsatani phil. You know, people, uh,
people try to predict this stuff all the time, with
a lot of great success. You might have justices sometimes
(09:09):
who are just testing the waters with some of their
comments and questions. It doesn't necessarily reveal where their thinking is.
But since everybody else is going to do it, I'll
jump in and guess a little bit as well. I
think you have kind of an interest. It's going to
be very interesting. I'd love to be behind the scenes
to hear how these arguments play out. It's clear to
(09:30):
me that at least the three usual liberal justices Kagan, Sodamaiyoor,
and Jackson are perfectly fine with the Eighth Amendment being
used as it has been, and perfectly fine with the
Ninth Circuit decision, and so that is not likely to change.
(09:50):
There's also it seems pretty clear that that three of
the justices Gorsich, Alito, and Roberts are uh, not too
happy with the Ninth Circuit and would do not think
that the Eighth Amendment is the right vehicle for deciding
this particular issue. Essentially, uh with with the view that
(10:16):
that you're they're they're not punishing somebody's status as being homeless,
They're punishing the conduct that comes along with being homelessness,
which is camping and uh out in the street. But
there's also a few, including Justice Thomas. By the way,
this argument went two hours, and I believe every single
(10:38):
Justice asked the question or made a comment, including Thomas,
which is unusual, although he has been doing it more recently.
He and Barrett and potentially Kavanaugh seem to be hung
up a little bit on whether uh, the Eighth Amendment
(10:58):
should be used ahead of time, before somebody is arrested
or fined, in order to adjudicate whether their rights have
been violated. So here's what I mean by that. In
the Grants Pass case, and this is fairly underreported, but
one of the most serious problems with the Grants Pass
(11:20):
case is that they certified a class action. Now, when
you have a class action, that means that you're going
to you're saying all of these people who are in
the affected class. We're not going to individually adjudicate each
and every one of their cases. We're going to treat
them all as if they're exactly the same and if
(11:41):
and they can bring this as a class action, and
that puts it risk a city who gets something wrong,
that puts them on the hook for mass damages and
huge attorneyses. So the class action part of this is
(12:02):
that the eighth circuit was used in advance, before anybody
got arrested, before anybody got fined. These plaintiffs didn't face
any consequences. They just said ahead of time, we shouldn't
be subject to a citation or to an arrest. And
I think these three judges are saying no, I think
that until I think we're going to have to analyze
(12:23):
each of these each individual situation on a case by
case basis. So they're going to have to be arrested
or fined first, and then we'll look at the courts
can look at their individual situation and determine whether they
are being prosecuted or fined because they are involuntarily homeless
(12:46):
and have no bed, no other place to go, and
that would be a huge win for the cities if
they do that. Now, what's interesting about it is that
the three liberal justices who are going to see that
they're not going to win flat out on the eighth Amendment,
they will probably try to back that and and try
(13:08):
to have the court essentially punt on this. And so
we'll see what happens. But I don't, okay, So it's been.
Speaker 1 (13:14):
A punt okay. So so I mean if that happens
the way you laid it out, then then uh, cities
and towns would be able to remove these people, but they'd.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Be able to arrest and find them.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
Yeah, right, but that but but then the the the
homeless could go and seek some sort of appeal in court.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
On an individual basis by case, which which which not
everybody is going to do obviously, So be it. So
here as it stands right now, if I'm a city,
I can't just go out and say I'm going to
prohibit people from sleeping on the streets and I'll take
my chances in court, because as it stands right now,
the Eighth Amendment would allow somebody to file a lawsuit
(13:56):
before they've even been arrested, before their own circumstances have
been analyzed and looked at. It all and say you can't,
you can't have that ordinance. But and and they would
have to then refine and define their their their ordinance
in such a way that it would be almost impossible
to ever enforce if it goes the other way, and
(14:17):
the court says, we're going to analyze this on an
individual basis, case by case. Now, you they still have
the Eighth Amendment, it's still intact. And so if if
somebody is able to prove that they are completely they're
they're living and camping on the street because completely involuntarily.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
Right, they have no option.
Speaker 2 (14:37):
They got no option at all. No nothing's been offered
to them. They have no family, they have no place
else they can go. They have this is all they is,
truly no option. Then they still have an Eighth Amendment
defense in their particular case, but they have to go
and adjudicate that. And what's really going to this is
this is the misconception about all this and straw men
(15:00):
that the liberal side and the advocates for the homeless
are pushing here is that, well, the cities just want
to arrest and find people. They really don't. They just
want to use this that they want to have it
as a tool in their tool belt. They want to
be able to get help to the people who really
need and.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
Want and you need to have at least in the
background coercion in order to force people to have to
get the help. That has to be implied that look,
we're going to try to help you here, but if
you keep saying no over and over again, we can
go to be consequences.
Speaker 2 (15:37):
Exactly that's exactly right. And they don't they don't have
to jail space, they don't have the police time to
go out and start or just as arresting people. They're
not going to do that. They want to get the
people who really need help. They want to have some
aspect of coercion to be able to get them to
agree to do it or move along. And if you can,
(15:58):
if they have the ability to do that, if they
can go out and use that in that that tool
in the tool belt, that's going to take care of
a lot of people who really do need help. And
then it's going to be much harder for the vagrants
who are just there because they can be it's going
to make it harder for them to hide. And yeah, the.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Ones, the ones who moved to California because they heard
it's anything goes in the streets exactly, all right.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
And they're going to find out it doesn't any It's
not anything goes anymore.
Speaker 1 (16:28):
Jeff, thank you for coming on. I've got to do
the news. I really appreciate you laying out your analysis
of today's case.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
I hope it helps, and yeah, we'll keep our fingers crossed.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
All right. Jeff Briggs. And he's an attorney, and he
was among those who filed amicus briefs in the Supreme
Court case today regarding whether cities and towns in the
West can they force homeless out of the encampments.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI A six.
Speaker 1 (16:57):
I guess I'm going to put out a warning if
if you're sensitive, there's going to be some sexual discussion here,
not exactly sexual discussion, but body part analysis. Should I
go away? Oh no, you're going to want to stay
for this. You remember, we had we had some creepy
gynecologists at USC and U c l A. Yeah, that
(17:21):
had a long history of sexually abusing young college women. Also,
you had Larry Nasser, who not only was sexually abusing
members of the US Olympic gymnastics team. But he was
also what was that Michigan University of Michigan or Michigan State.
I forget which which one he worked at there, but
(17:42):
that was three prominent schools and the women's gymnastics team
hit by these these disgusting perverts disguised as gynecologists. Well,
we have another one of these characters, slightly different, but
there is the Harbor UCLA Medical Center. That's that's a
(18:02):
public hospital and one of its highest ranking doctors has
been fired. And his name is doctor Lewis Kwang, and
they said he would regularly gawk at the genitalia of
an esthetized patients. And in addition, he also had some
side corruption going on. He was getting paid by a
(18:24):
medical device company. He used those products on patients, didn't disclose.
But that's not that interesting. The interesting stuff is he
had a running commentary as he operated on on the patients.
He liked to look under the surgical covers of black
males who were under anesthesia and would discuss the genitals
(18:46):
of the day.
Speaker 4 (18:48):
The genitals of the genitals.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Of the day. I guess you know you have surgeons
have a number of patients on surgery day. Let's say
it's Wednesday, right, you know, you know you pread right Wednesday?
The ever available that they're in surgery, Well so you might,
I don't know, maybe three four five. And then whoever
the standout is gets the genitals of the day designation.
(19:11):
What kind of award do they get? Well, it's interesting
you say that. Kwang while he's doing surgery also discussed
his favorite sex positions and his preference for auto eerotic asphyxiation, which,
if you don't know, it's being choked or strangled during
sex to allegedly heighten the orgasm. I wouldn't know, Thanks
(19:37):
for sharing that. I don't hear you saying I wouldn't know.
Speaker 4 (19:40):
I wouldn't know.
Speaker 1 (19:41):
You wouldn't know, Okay, all right? He also would carry
a gun in the operating room. He's a volunteer deputy sheriff.
What well he would bring his gun in the operating room.
I mean, he's real gun. And that's not a euphemism
for do you think.
Speaker 4 (20:00):
Okay, so is somebody recording this or is he recording this?
Speaker 1 (20:04):
I don't know. This went on for a long time,
and eventually it took a lot of years to finally
get him to get him fired. He also would bring
a knife into the operating room and not the knife
that he would use for the surgery.
Speaker 4 (20:19):
And what did he do with that?
Speaker 1 (20:20):
It just it was on him. He had a gun
and a knife with him all the time.
Speaker 4 (20:23):
In case the patient woke up fought him.
Speaker 1 (20:30):
Turns out that Quang's secretary complained more than ten years
ago that Kwang would remark on the grooming of an
esthetized patient's puber care. This was going back to at
least twenty sixteen, but the hospital didn't start their investigation
until twenty twenty one, and when they then put him
(20:54):
on paid leave. All right, he's been on paid leave
since twenty twenty one, and they paid him more than
a million dollars without work. That's the county government. In
twenty twenty three, he did not work a single day
(21:15):
and he was the eighth highest paid county employee. Okay,
that's ridiculous, isn't it. I mean, I don't even know
what to say. There's nothing to say. The thing is,
all the county supervisors know about this, all the hospital
officials know about this, and nobody cares.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
You.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Harbor UCLA treats mostly poor patients and uninsured patients in
the South Bay. It's a teaching hospital and he's the
chairman of the orthopedics department. So he wasn't even working
on Genitalia. That was.
Speaker 4 (21:53):
I shouldn't be laughing, but of course he wasn't.
Speaker 1 (21:56):
You've been laughing at a lot of inappropriate Stay with
the show is inappropriate? Could you miss us when you
were in the middle of the Indian Ocean there you
don't get entertainment like this in the Maldives. No, No,
those people would be in prison Sometimes I think about
how what countries if we were working in we'd be
in prison.
Speaker 4 (22:14):
Oh, you would never be able to talk about this
on a.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
Dubairas Yes, that's right, you would be.
Speaker 3 (22:22):
In a lock.
Speaker 4 (22:24):
I would have to send you bailbon.
Speaker 1 (22:27):
I think they would take my head off anyway. He
said he created an unprofessional and toxic work environment. Yeah
you think. Let's say you've got a little more here.
According to Kwang's discharge notice, okay, this firing papers, three
people told investigators that he referred to black patients as BAP,
(22:50):
which stood for Black Angry Patients and uh, well, I
can't even read what this is. Let's let's just say
he engaged racial slurs and terrible stereotypes. But they said
he was fixated on the genitalia of patients. They had
an end of the year roast, and male genitalia were
(23:13):
shown at an annual end of the year event. So that's.
Speaker 4 (23:21):
So other people saw.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Yeah right, it was an end of the year roast.
This is all in the La Times. I'm not making
up a single word here, and it was, and he
used to comment that certain female residents liked it. On top,
a technician told the surgical team to check out and
an esthetize patient's penis because it was very large. Kwan
(23:45):
would discuss whether a patient was a grower or a shower.
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Wait, a grower or a shower. I don't even know
what that means. Maybe I'm ignorant because Eric's giving me
a weird look.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
But all some men are growers and some men are showers.
It is what it says, it is. That's exactly what
it is.
Speaker 4 (24:05):
Okay, I feel like I'm missing something, but okay, forget it.
You don't need to talk about it anymore.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
He would. He would also comment on the fat rolls
of female patients. What nice guy.
Speaker 4 (24:20):
Yeah, so but okay, I have an idea. Let's strip
this guy down and let's do a commentary on his
entire body.
Speaker 1 (24:31):
I want my million dollars, and that too, a million dollars.
That's up scene to not work. And they and they
knew about this. Uh, they knew about this for eight
years and he just got fired eight years. Here you go,
good work, all right.
Speaker 3 (24:52):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
This is one of those everyday stories. This is what
This is the real world consequences of having millions of
illegal aliens come over the border. Right, that seems so abstract,
it's just cold numbers. But what's the reality in certain
communities to have this huge influx of lawlessness. Well, East
(25:19):
Harlem High School soccer game public field, and it actually
was a travel team made of seventeen year old boys.
The teams called the Manhattan Kickers, and they showed up
at the soccer field and found that a group of
illegal aliens were already there and they weren't going to
leave the field. The coach, Eric Johnson said, I directly
(25:44):
asked them to leave, and some of them thought about it,
but then four or five of them said, you know fit,
we don't have to leave. We can do whatever we want.
There were forty team, forty boys from two teams. These
are legitimate teams made up of Americans, and they showed
up Sunday evening at Thomas Jefferson Park in East Harlem,
(26:07):
five o'clock match. It was the Kickers in fa Euro
New York for American kids, but on the field where
thirty men who appeared to be African migrants spoke little
English and they wouldn't leave to try to resolve the conflict.
The cops that showed up wanted to see a copy.
(26:31):
Wanted to see a copy of the club team's city permit.
He didn't ask the African migrants to show a permit,
but he asked the city team to show a permit.
They didn't have it on them because, as Johnson said,
(26:53):
when two teams show up in uniform with a referee
and two coaches, usually nobody is asking to see a permit.
And by time Johansson's assistant could forward a copy, the
game had been delayed thirty minutes, and by then the
two American teams didn't feel safe because Johnson said, even
when the game is over. You don't know if they're
waiting for you, So even if the cops kicked them out,
(27:17):
it may not be over. And they decided both teams
decided this is too dangerous. Parents told them they were
rattled by the incident and they don't want to play
at the field anymore. Of course, there aren't too many
available fields in East Harlem. Field space is limited, but
the migrants won that one. Police wouldn't enforce the law.
(27:39):
Nobody does conways here, We've got some heavy news today, John.
I know Monday is.
Speaker 5 (27:43):
Supposed to be light, but there's a shriff's deputy that's
been there's swarming a neighborhood in West Covina following a
shooting that apparently targeted a motorcycle deputy in the area,
so we'll talk about that. Also locking you out of
flint Ridge. A school is on lockdown because of a
lunatic there. So those are the two heavy stories. But
if you know it's today, there's not a lot of
(28:05):
people out on the road. I don't know what's going on.
I notice that I think it's a combination of Coachella,
Jewish Holiday, and I don't know it's spring.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
I don't know but there's nobody out of there, like
when you analyze the calendars. It's one of my favorite
parts of the show. But nobody's in the calendar effect trap.
Speaker 5 (28:28):
Although you know, maybe it's a post four to twenty
hangover to yesterday was for twenty? How'd you celebrate four twenty?
Wasn't aware of it? You didn't take a big ripper?
Speaker 1 (28:39):
I never do.
Speaker 5 (28:40):
No, you didn't break out Deborah Deborah Cobelt six foot
glass bong.
Speaker 1 (28:46):
Yeah, that's what we do at my house, sit around
the kitchen table, sucking on bond.
Speaker 5 (28:50):
You put her up on your shoulders and she gets
hits that six foot She loves that.
Speaker 1 (28:54):
Yeah, yeah, dragonfly, what'd you get push? You think I
know this stuff? I don't know.
Speaker 5 (29:01):
I Eric, you know all the weeds or are a crozier?
What are some of the popular weeds? White widow cush.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
So far, you're the only one who knows hard ty stick,
dime bag. Like you're doing pretty well there. Yeah, I lid.
You don't need any help from them seedless they still seedless.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (29:23):
This is what you do all day.
Speaker 5 (29:24):
Shake Mexican shake. Remember that weed when you're a kid
By dimebag of that back crap. I thought you can
get your buzzy, all right, so whatever, okay, thing, all right,
we're here.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
Crozier's got the news Why twenty four hour CAFI Newsroom. Hey,
you've been listening to The John Cobalt Show podcast. You
can always hear the show live on KFI AM six
forty from one to four pm every Monday through Friday,
and of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.