YouSaid · the spoken record

Neal Katyal

lines on the record: 110
first: 2019-12-09
most recent: 2019-12-09
sittings or episodes: 1
sources: podcast

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“That's sort of a justice department. It's a justice department opinion, but it's not that he's innocent. And indeed, he can be tried right afterwards. And by the way, that very memo says, you can't indict the sitting president, but you could do something else to him. It's called impeach.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Right. I think both are good, but I think it's important to say Mueller did land the blow in the report. I mean, Mueller detailed 10 different instances of obstruction of justice, and that was obstruction of the president as president doing things like firing Comey and the like. And the reason that that didn't ultimately culminate in an indictment against the president, I don't think is Mueller's fault, it was the Attorney General Barr comes in and Foe summarizes the report with a four-page memo that says basically that Trump is cleared, but doesn't ever explain why Trump is cleared. Trump is cleared, according to Barr, because a sitting president is constitutionally immune from being indicted. Not that he's innocent.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Right, right. And so now from here we go. So Mueller wasn't able to land the blow, in other words, or really finishing. Why was that? Because there, because he was a candidate and that there wasn't enough linkage between intent and...”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“The central reason I wrote the book is to say to Americans, look, the rules you set here are going to apply not just for President Trump, but for every future president, a President Elizabeth Warren, or Pete Buttig, or whomever you want. And, you know, the best way to think about it is to what I tell my law students, which is just pretend the identity of the parties are reversed. So don't think it's President Trump. Pretend in your mind it's President Obama who did all this stuff. Would you say, oh, that's okay, it's perfect. It's okay. China, go ahead and give Obama information for his re-election campaign or cast doubt on one of Obama's opponents. Of course not. That's not a democracy. Right.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Well, I mean, Terribly, I would imagine. I mean, look, I think Biden at the time in July was certainly his chief political rival, according to every poll. And, you know, look, I don't think the president would, I'm sure he'd do it if he had the opportunity with some other candidate, Elizabeth Warren, or whomever. Yeah, exactly. So I think that's another thing that I think makes this different because this president, when confronted with all this, he hasn't said what I think you and I would do if we got in this situation like oh my God, I did something horribly wrong. Instead, he's like, oh, there's nothing wrong. It's perfect. It's beautiful. I'll do it again. China, if you're listening, give me dirt on Biden. And the central.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Bruce McMadison Foreign aid, whatever. In this case, foreign aid. Can I ask you a really stupid question? Why Biden? Why this? Because he feels like he was his biggest challenger. Well, I mean, he has Bloomberg coming out on the right, which must worry him terribly, I would imagine.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“And yeah, not for the nation's benefit, but for his own personal ends. And that's what 12 witnesses have come forth. That's the consistent story they're all saying.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“So, the thing about Ukraine is that the president is using his powers as commander in chief and with the awesome powers given to him by the constitution to help his private ends. He's not a private citizen like you and me running for an election, which is bad. I'm not at all saying it's not. But it is the height of constitutional irresponsibility because our founders basically said that they wanted a strong president. Like in the Constitution and the Federalist papers like Madison Hamilton talk about secrecy and dispatch because Congress often can't get stuff done. So you want to have a really strong president. But they said because that president is so strong, he's liable to possibly do stuff that's against the national interest and against the people's interest. That's why impeachment's in there. And now you've got exactly that. You've got the president using the suite of powers he has as commander in chief, not for the nation's benefit. Foreign aid or whatever.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Number two is the allegations were about the president not as president, but as a candidate. And that's really different. I mean, when you think about Ukraine, the thing that's to me is an”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, so I think the Mueller investigation, first of all, it was a serious law enforcement investigation involving a lot of stuff that was in Russia within the Russian language and lots of complicated facts that had to be developed. And ultimately, they indicted a lot of people. They've indicted a lot of people, including the president's national security advisor and people like that. So that's going to take a certain amount of time. So that's, I think, one problem was just the length of time done for all sorts of good reasons, but nonetheless...”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Exactly. It's a big deal. So basically Mueller testifies to Congress on July 24th, and I think it's fair to say, I mean, I was covering the hearing for NBC. It didn't go well for Mueller and frankly for the American people. And it's, I think, no coincidence that the phone call that the president had with the Ukrainian president, this transcript or memorandum of the conversation we're talking about, the next day, July 25th. He's feeling good. And the president did feel emboldened. And this is another reason that I decided to write the book, is with Mueller, I thought to myself, you know, look, I'm not a TV person. I'm a Supreme Court lawyer. But I thought to myself if I could go on TV and explain to the American people what was happening, I'd written the Special Counsel regulations that Mueller was appointed under when I was a young pup at the Justice Department. And so I was like, if I can explain all this, then the people will see it and see how grave this was. And that just didn't happen.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“election campaigns. Drip tracks and things like that. Now, in this case, I wouldn't say the failure of the Mueller investigation, but I think in a lot of ways it was emboldening because this happened right after that, after he felt he got off, which I think he kind of did. When you talk a little bit about that in the background of this, because they were thinking about pulling in the roller thing. Yeah, it's a big thing.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Also, he's a jerk. I hope they do what I suggest in the book, which is to have these three articles focused on Ukraine, Article 1, abusive power, going and seeking Ukraine's help to get dirt from your chief political rival. Article 2, bribery up the quid pro quo, withholding military aid until you get what you want and withholding the White House meeting. And Article 3 obstruction of justice. But within those articles, I think that they can bring in additional information about the president's pattern of conduct, both with respect to obstruction and his penchant for going and getting some help from his friends in election campaigns. Because the Russians. Because the Russians in 2016, which Mueller was investigating. And so I think that can all come in that way. And actually, we have a precedent for this. That's how the Nixon articles of impeachment were drafted. They focused on Watergate tightly in the drafting of the articles themselves, but then as supporting evidence for each...”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, it just happened to show up on a highly classified server that only the president and his close political aides can see. Right.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Anyway, I was just going to say, now the modern day equivalent is when the transcript of that phone call was generated, that July 25th phone call, it was poet on a very highly classified air-gapped server to basically keep it away from other people so they couldn't see it so people couldn't see it.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“That's what he has for breakfast. What can I do to obstruct justice today? Nixon, you know, thought about it and said, yeah, I'm going to try and gag some employees from testifying during impeachment. But even he backed down. So this is the first time in our history we've had a president do this. Well, he had a couple witnesses that he wanted to, and then he ultimately tried to block those tapes, but he didn't try and block every document that was trumped. Yeah, you're right. And of course, when he tried to block the tapes, that went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court unanimously, even though there were three appointees that Nixon had put on the Supreme Court. They all voted against Nixon. Right, right.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, it's more than littering. I know, I know, I know, I know. Well, that's, I think, the point, and that's what I argue in the book we should focus on Ukraine because it's a tight, simple story, the one I just shared with you a moment ago. And, you know, the other piece of this, though, that the president has done is because he is so gagged every employee and every document and the like, obstruction of justice, I think, has to be account in the articles of impeachment. Literally no president has done this in our lifetime. I mean, Nixon wakes up.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“That's just low level grifting. It's just a constitutional violation. It's low level grifting. Right. So look, I mean, I think that one of the reasons.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Them Yeah, possibly even off on the hotel. That's my feeling. I'm like, let him off on the hotel. That's just low level drifting. It's just a constitutional violation. I understand it's low level. Right.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, and then it went to the House Judiciary Committee for a one day of hearings on what is an impeachable offense. We had four constitutional law scholars debate that question. Then the next day, Speaker of the House, Pelosi, said that she was going to order the drafting of impeachment articles, and that's where we are now, is the drafting of those articles. And the central question, I think they are wrestling with is how broadly or nearly do they define them? Do they want them tightly focused on Ukraine, or do they want them broader to encompass Mueller's allegations, Russia possibly? The obstruction. Yeah, possibly even on the hook.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“That's a beautiful summary of that. I'm pretty sure I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that's what they're doing. So they can call it that not everyone gets to speak thing and therefore it's not legitimate. That's what they're saying. All right, so it went through the intelligence committee, which lots of people watched, lots of people didn't, but many people in Washington certainly did.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“I know. I'm like, no, you don't get to pretend you're telling us things without telling us things. It's not flirty in any way. It's attractive to anyone in the United States. And the excuse they're using is, from what I can tell, We can't do this trial because not everyone has spoken, but we're not letting anybody speak.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Exactly. A few people defied the president, including Trump administration appointees. So that's a pretty remarkable development. But many have not. So we still haven't heard from a lot of key players like the chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Pompeo, the Secretary of State, John Bolton, the National Security Advisor, and the like. We're going to get to him in a minute. I understand why.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“The witness, by the way, the president ordered all executive branch employees not to testify and said not a document, not a phone call record, nothing could be turned over to Congress because he deemed this in his judgment illegitimate. So you have that committee. Now this week we have an end.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“I tried, you know, I didn't rob right. I didn't rob the bank. I got caught, so no problem, no harm, no follow. I gave the money back. Exactly. So that launched a congressional investigation. And we're seeing that now. It's split out among six different committees in the Congress, but we had these House Intelligence Committee for a couple of weeks call witnesses. And by the way, all the cases.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, so where we are right now is that we first had a whistleblower complaint in August. That got to Congress on September 9th. And miraculously, on September 11th, the aid that the Ukrainians were promised and being held up all of a sudden flowed to them again. Coincidence. Exactly. What's the difference?”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“We're here with Neil Katjal. He's a partner at the law firm Hogan Lovells and the author of a very timely new book called Impeach the Case Against Donald Trump. He's also been very involved in tech law, legal issues around tech. And we talked a little bit about that. Let's talk about this case. Where are we right now? We'll talk about the historic, you're talking about the historical ideas that this”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Exactly. So this is true at the founding. And what happens when Gary says this is Madison and Hamilton say, oh no, what about if you have a president who's beholden to a foreign power or seeks foreign influence? Or what if you have a president who cheats on the re-election campaign? I mean, literally, you know, this is the paradigmatic case of why impeachment is in the Constitution. Even Albridge Geary changes his mind in the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 and says, yeah, we do need to put impeachment in there. And so, yeah, it's remarkable that now two centuries later, the Trump argument is, oh, we're so close to an election, let's just solve it there. And that's always, I think, a bad argument, but it's a particularly bad argument here because that's the very election he's trying to cheat in. So it's kind of like if you and I are playing a game of monopoly and you accuse me of cheating and I say, well, let's resolve this by playing another game of monopoly.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Exactly. So because of that, and the book basically starts by saying, well, why do we have impeachment in the document? What's it about? Many of our founders like Albridge Gary didn't want to put it in at all. They said, you know, there's re-elections. The president will be subject to re-election. And back then, there weren't two terms, so it could be many re-elections. And so that will police an executive who's going to.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“So it actually flows exactly from what we were just talking about. I wrote it for one simple reason, which is I knew Trump was going to flood us with disinformation and throw up chaff every day of the week. And the reason to write a book like this is to say, hey, there's a central snarrative around impeachment. It's really simple. It doesn't change from day to day with what phone call and what witness comes before Congress. It's simply this. The president tried to cheat in the 2020 election with the help of a foreign government. He got caught, but he tried. And that is a core impeachable offense. And everything about that is revealed in the July 25th memorandum of the phone call he had with the Ukrainian president. We don't have a full transcript. So we try to cheat.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“So, particularly It is ind Right, well, that's exactly which will get us into Trump. That's what a lot of the stuff had. And what's interesting about it is how quickly it's gone into politics because of disinformation and things like that and how quickly it's moved into law, it's moved into all kinds of things that I don't think people thought about. There's more tech in the most recent impeachment crisis than I've ever seen. Interesting. You know, just yesterday the phone calls that he's on phone calls that the Russians are taping. And so the Russians probably have”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Exactly, and who's argued that actually flooding the market with speeches in a way is a way of censoring speech. So particularly brilliant way of thinking about it. It is indeed. And, you know, I think we're going to see some of those, we're seeing those problems right now.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, no, I mean, first of all, I don't understand why there shouldn't be more disclosure around this. I mean, I felt like that on the federal and the campaign finance, you know, I was part of the Citizens United team and so on. And I've always felt like, you know, even if you believe money is speech and blah, blah, blah, at least you should be forcing disclosure of where all of the information of money is coming from and the like. So I think that's an early place to start. The other thing I'm really intrigued by the internet really rises. It raises is Tim Wu's point about how”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Right. And then lastly, free speech, this whole do you have any thoughts on Mark's speech or the kind of areas they're staking out around it? I think they don't know what they're talking about. So that's my takeaway is that they're sort of conflating free speech and paid speech, even with Saja Baron Cohen managed to understand, which there's free reach and free speech and different things like that.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Exactly. I was going to say privacy. I think it's so central. And there are so many different ways in which we don't actually know what's happening with our data and information. And yeah, so I suspect there will be a lot of attention on that. Certainly there's more in Europe right now, but I think that we'll come back to America, the California law is a good example of a start.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Never. Yeah. Not in general. Never. Not anymore. Maybe once. Like for a week, essentially. I mean, it's a really interesting mentality because one of the things that I always try to say to them is that you aren't victims. You are the richest people in the world and you have the most money. You have the most lobbying money. You have the most power. Unusually in charge of things. And then you act as if we're trying to asking for transparency or privacy or any of the things that I think are reasonable asks for these companies seems to feel like a full frontal attack on them. Like you get the wide sort of like the Nancy Pelosi question, why do you hate? I was like, I don't hate you. I just don't want you down my throat with your data requests kind of thing. And so it's a really interesting thing. Where do you imagine the first? Do you have any thought of where the first important stuff is going to happen?”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Sort of Yeah, again, I'm not, you know, I certainly can't speak for all of them. But, you know, I'm just a little bit surprised by the hubris around this issue in the valley. It feels a little bit trumpy, like, oh, we're the underdog. We're the one who are always getting picked on. You're not the under, you know, in general, you're not the underdog. Never. Yeah. Not in general. Never.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, they don't seem to want to discuss. They seem to sort of stake out a case. And why is that having worked with them again? You don't say who you, but what is the mentality that you get from the tech industry? I know what I get, but I have a different relationship with them than you do.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Well, I mean, we have different models, for example, like, you know, for movies, for example, right? There's rating systems and things like that, which they developed on their own. I'd like to see”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, I don't think I have anything particularly insightful to say there. I mean, I think that that's a standard problem with investigations. But I do think that just, you know, the very fact that investigations don't work so well is just one more reason why I think industry needs to think much more about self-regulation. It's the right thing to do. What would that look like?”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Can you stack rank them from where you think they're the ones that are most in tech term, by the way, stack ranking? They love to use that with employees in tech. But can you give an idea of what you think will come before the other? I mean, I've talked to a lot of people at Justice Department. They're worried that they're going to start doing investigations and then what they're investigating will have passed them by, like that's their worry is that the stuff they're going to try to deal with will be over by the time they get to it, seven years or whatever it takes to do that. Some of the regulators feel the same way and a lot of the legislators feel like that, that they can. And then, of course, there's the reality of politics where nothing gets passed anywhere”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“He's a bright individual, and yet what's coming out of his mouth on this issue is something to be desired. And so I am really worried about the way in which there's almost effectively a race to not necessarily the bottom, but a race to regulate. And one of the things I think industry has not done a good job of, but really needs to, is explore models for self-regulation and be serious about it, because if they're not, then we are going to get into this race among the other regulators.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, so just speaking descriptively and not normatively, I am worried about the way in which there's a race among some to regulate really hard and just get attention in the media and whatever and get a brand as a certain type of politician. You're speaking of John.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, exactly. And they all took time to get regulated to railroads. I think another example of that, it took time. And so I think we're now starting to see that time start to develop in, you know, different modes of regulation. So it doesn't always have to be a heavy hand that you, you know, a standard. It could be some sort of goal that is tried to be met, incentives, other things like that, and sunlight. So, you know, hopefully Congress will be willing to shed more sunlight on what's actually happening and hope that that will actually...”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“There was one in the library and then one at the desk. And so we literally went up with the justices to the library and showed them the internet. Oh my gosh.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“every Yeah, I think one thing that's happened, and this goes back well before the internet age, is just that reluctance of Congress to legislate in this area. They're scared. They just don't understand it. So we're literally governed by a law called ECBA, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act from 1986 before email was even invented, effectively invented. And so you've got the reluctance of Congress to do very much. And then you've got sometimes judges who, particularly at the state level, who'll jump in and do a lot because they feel like, well, nobody else is. So they'll use their common law powers to do things. And then you have a federal judiciary that by and large has been so scared of technology they don't know what to do with it. I actually clerked for Justice Breyer during the communications decency act case when it was at the court. And I was the only person who had a laptop that connected to the internet in the entire building. Right. And so.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“No, they weren't there. They weren't there. At that point No, it has. Actually, nobody had painted it. And in fact, the overriding law was just Section 230, which was a protective. I wrote about that at the Washington Post when I worked here a long time ago because I wrote about the Communications Decency Act, most of which was invalidated except for that part. And so talk about sort of the changing ideas. So you're advising these firms, various firms, you don't have to tell me which ones unless you want to, because I know lawyers are that way.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Well, at that point, I think that we were seeing a sector of the economy that was expanding in a way that was really creating a lot of opportunities for people. And, you know, I just think there's so many things that are done now, like my mom, who's 85, can do a whole bunch of things she couldn't do before because of technology. So, you know, at least some of the problems that now are apparent that we've seen and that you've done more than anyone to draw attention to, I don't think that they just weren't on our radar, at least as, you know, at that point. They weren't there. At that point in time, I was a litigator, so maybe there were people in the government thinking about it, but it hadn't bubbled up before it actually.”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“No, I don't think so. I mean, you know, I guess, you know, I did run the Google Books case for the government and where the federal government was opposed to the Google Books settlement. But for the most part, I think that the Obama administration took a pretty friendly line toward technology. And I think at that point, for good reason”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“There is no laws. Exactly. And I had the benefit of arguing five big tech cases at the Supreme Court when I was in the government. So as a result, I said to myself, this is just strategically a really interesting area. It's also an area where I happen to know a lot of friends. And so I started really actually an advisor, not as a litigator. I was actually just helping them think through really hard problems if you're designing an artificial intelligence product in the health space. Is that a device that has to be regulated with the FDA or whatever? Or how do we think about driverless cars and insurance markets and things like that?”
2019-12-09 · Decoder with Nilay Patel · Recode Decode: Neal Katyal · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT