Trump’s Executive Orders, Legality, Litigation, and Impact

Episode Notes

Transcript

Qasim Rashid:

This has been the case for many presidential elections before, but the single largest demographic of registered voters were people who did not vote. They could have all banded together for a third party candidate that we always hear about and they could have elected a third party candidate. But that’s fundamentally the issue. And we could talk about voter suppression and we can talk about gerrymandering and we should ultimately, what we’ve seen consistently across the board even before Citizens United is an apathy in the civic engagement process. And unfortunately, this is one of the end results of that apathy.

Announcer:

Welcome to the award-winning podcast, Lawyer 2 Lawyer with J. Craig Williams, bringing you the latest legal news and observations with the leading experts in the legal profession. You are listening to Legal Talk Network.

J. Craig Williams:

Welcome to Lawyer 2 Lawyer on the Legal Talk Network. I’m Craig Williams, coming to you from Southern California. I write a blog named May It please the court once in a while and have three books out titled How To Get Sued the Sled and My newest book. How Would You Decide 10 Famous Trials That Changed History? You can find All three on Amazon. In addition, our new podcast miniseries in Dispute, 10 famous trials that changed history is currently featured here on the Legal Talk Network and in your favorite podcasting app. Please listen and subscribe with the stroke of the pen. President Trump signed a record number of executive orders, some 35 in all attempting to change the fabric of our nation, attempting to undo years of legislation and actually challenging the Constitution of the United States from birthright citizenship to the elimination of DEI programs to a freeze on federal aid.

These orders stand to impact millions of people. Well, today on Lawyer 2 Lawyer, we’ll take a look at Trump’s recent executive orders, spotlighting some of these orders including birthright citizenship, the elimination of DEI programs and the freeze on federal aid. We’ll discuss reaction, the legality of these orders, the executive branch versus Congress litigation, and the potential impact these orders could have on the people of our nation. And to help us better understand today’s topic, we’re joined by special guest Qasim Rashid Qasim is a human rights lawyer, author, and former congressional candidate. Professionally, Qasim supports major organizations, small businesses, candidates for office and nonprofits to improve their corporate strategies, messaging and innovation. His human rights work includes supporting survivors of domestic and sexual violence, representing asylum seekers, uplifting the incarcerated through prison chaplaincy, and advocating for universal religious freedom. Qasim is also host of the wildly popular podcast, the Qasim Rashid Show featured on SiriusXM. Welcome to the show, Qasim.

Qasim Rashid:

It’s great to be here, Craig. Thank you for having me.

J. Craig Williams:

Well, give us a little bit of background about yourself and how you became involved in human rights.

Qasim Rashid:

Well, I’m an immigrant to this country, immigrated at a very young age at about four, and for me, the main turning point probably was nine 11 when you go from being an American with a sibling in the US Marines to suddenly being the foreigner that everyone is afraid of. And I understood very quickly that unless we build our own platforms and right our own narratives and humanize ourselves, then there are going to be less than savory forces who are trying to do the opposite. And so for me, the fight to human rights really began from personal experience about the need to just protect the humanity in all of us across race, religion, culture, creed, nationality. That led to me getting more involved in writing and advocacy, public speaking. I think law school took it to the next level because now I better understood why the law is the way it is and how we change policy and how we be better advocates.

And over the last 25 or 24 years or so since I’ve been on this journey, there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that despite our differences, so much of what we want across the political spectrum across the globe is just the basic human rights of having safety and security, economic justice, climate justice, and my work really revolves around building capacity, whether it’s through legal advocacy, whether it’s being a first responder after a disaster. My focus is how do we uplift humanity in general and create a world that essentially is better and safer for all of our children

J. Craig Williams:

On behalf of about probably half the Americans who care. I apologize for the treatment that you had to go through.

Qasim Rashid:

Well, it’s part of the world we live in, and I think I reflect on the work done by the founding pillars of this nation. And when I refer to the founding pillars, I mean people like Elizabeth Freeman who successfully sued for her own freedom. People like Robert Smalls who stole a confederate vessel and helped the North win the Civil War. People like Muhammad Khan, a Muslim immigrant who enlisted in the Civil War two months after arriving and helped the union win the Civil War. And we all have our moment to step up against injustice. And I see what we’re experiencing now as that moment, and I think we all need to be ready for playing our part.

J. Craig Williams:

Well, we certainly have a part to play and let’s get started with that because let’s talk about executive orders. I mean, as lawyers, we probably all understand that there are three branches of government that Congress issues legislation and the Supreme Court issues decisions. But what’s an executive order and how does it play into our lives?

Qasim Rashid:

Well, I think that until the most recent 2016 first term of the Trump administration, most folks probably didn’t care or didn’t know. And what they’re seeing him use the executive order for is making them pay attention. And essentially, it’s a very common presidential document that every president has issued at some point during their presidency is assigned and written and published directive from the president that essentially manages the operations of the federal government. That’s kind of at the basic level of these proclamations. They’re often administrative. They often address how the federal government should function or certain policies or initiatives of the federal government. They certainly do not supersede the Constitution. They certainly do not supersede legislation and they cannot overturn legislation or the Constitution and they can be overturned by another president. But legislation can also not directly overturn an executive order. It can make it very difficult for it to be implemented. But I think a lot of the debate right now is how much power and authority does an executive order really have, and that’s causing a lot of the chaos that we’re seeing in our country right now.

J. Craig Williams:

Right. Well, and that’s kind of an apt name because from what I’ve seen, we’ve got a new president that’s earned in the nickname President Chaos.

Qasim Rashid:

Yeah.

J. Craig Williams:

We’ve seen some insanity over the last couple of days with spending being frozen and then unfrozen potentially even to provoke a constitutional challenge. What’s going on?

Qasim Rashid:

Well, I think part of it’s shifting the Overton window, which is the term that’s used to describe what we consider normal and shifting it over what would’ve been considered outrageous some years ago is now much more normalized. One very simple example is it would’ve been outrageous years ago for a president to fraternize with neo-Nazis and white supremacists or to do a Hitler salute from behind the presidential seal, one of his closest allies. And now it’s been normalized unfortunately, and I think the strategy that Trump is engaging in with these onslaught of hundreds of executive orders is to frustrate, is to confuse and to exhaust the public senator, Chris Murphy calls it the American version of Bliss Creek, the Hitler Lightning strike of just trying to overwhelm the system so that people just check out and you’re allowed to, you’re able to advance in your corruption.

My view is that Trump’s initial attempt is to kind of set the tone of how he’s going to, I don’t want to say function because I don’t think he actually functions of how he’s going to operate, but then eventually be able to elevate these issues to the Supreme Court, which as you know, Craig is six three conservative and he’s willing to bet that he pushes enough of these really wild ideas up through the Supreme Court. Eventually they’re going to buckle and they’re going to support him, and it’s going to further enhance his power and further strengthen his power more than they already have given him. That I think is what the strategy is from him right now,

J. Craig Williams:

Let’s start with one of the ones that’s obviously a difficult one for the Supreme Court to overturn birthright citizenship.

Qasim Rashid:

You say it’s difficult for them to overturn, but with the Supreme Court, I just don’t know anymore. I think find some way. The 14th Amendment guarantees a birthright citizenship and it was part of the reconstruction amendments and it was designed to ensure that formerly enslaved Africans were recognized as full citizens, but that obviously still didn’t come into effect for some time for him to challenge that and under the theories that he’s challenging, it would in my view, undermine the entire point of due process of law, the entire point of citizenship, the entire point of the Constitution. And if the Supreme Court audaciously goes and tries to overturn an actual effectively an amendment, although they would argue that they’re just overturning the incorrect interpretation of the amendment, I think it really undermines the last semblance of a democratic republic that we have left in this country. I think that would ensue a constitutional crisis that would make us no different than under Victor Orban or under Vladimir Putin, and that’s a frightening proposition to consider.

J. Craig Williams:

It’s a terribly frightening proposition to consider. And be honest with you, one of the things I wanted to talk with you about today is our own practice as lawyers. I mean, can we any longer rely on precedent? Because I’ve come to the point where I’ve got to advise my clients, it may be the law today, but it may not be the law tomorrow.

Qasim Rashid:

I am sure you have many colleagues as I do who are law professors or teach in academia, and the consistent message I hear from so many of them is we can’t teach star decisis anymore because we don’t know what’s going to be precedent or whether precedent holds any value anymore. And we see that with the overturning of Roe. We see that with the overturning of affirmative action. We see that with the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, and I think it’s going to the Axon Doctrine. I think we’re going to see that kind of accelerate under this administration or this regime, however you want to talk about it. Trump just issued an executive order that he will be revoking visas for students who participated in protests for Palestinian liberation and Palestinian justice, a direct violation of the First Amendment. But again, the fact that he’s pushing the Overton window to a place where we’re not sure if the First Amendment matters anymore is quite shocking.

J. Craig Williams:

Aren’t we already in a constitutional crisis?

Qasim Rashid:

I think in some ways we are, and I kind of lay that at the feet of maybe an unpopular opinion with my fellow Democrats, but I lay that at the feet of Joe Biden and Merrick Garland. You are the most powerful politician in the world. You’re the top cop in the country. You know what you’re walking into. You’re walking into a situation where democracy is hanging by a thread where a president has incited an insurrection, something that even Senate majority leader Ms. McConnell attested to then in clear terms. And rather than exert all your resources to ensure that this person cannot undermine the Constitution, cannot be Above the Law, you delay and you wait and you wait until it’s too late. And now that person who tried to overthrow the government is in full control of the government with the House is Senate and a Supreme Court that is at his beckoning and backed by billionaires who will primary anyone who dares question him. So yes, I think in that respect, we already are in a constitutional crisis. It’s a question of how long can we hold on until it clearly becomes meaningless.

J. Craig Williams:

Well, we’re going to take a quick break to hear a word from our sponsors. We’ll be right back and welcome back to Lawyer 2 Lawyer. I’m back with Qasim. Rashid Qasim is a human rights lawyer, author, and former congressional candidate. We’ve been discussing executive orders and kind of the constitutional crisis that we find ourselves in. We have federal judges defining these things as blatantly unconstitutional. How more clear can it be? What are we going to do about this?

Qasim Rashid:

I mean, I think the judge, I can’t remember the judge’s name, but it was a Reagan appointee who lambasted the executive order trying to overturn birthright citizenship. And look, I tell folks that there’s two things that we need to consider. One, let’s consider the reality of the situation. I don’t like it when people sugarcoat and say, well, it’s not that serious, or, well, no, the institutions will hold up or no, the norms will hold up. That’s Merrick Garland talk that we have to maintain the norms. They won’t and they aren’t. And we’re in that boiling frog syndrome where we don’t realize how hot it’s gotten until it’s too late. But I also don’t think the conversation needs to end there. I think we need to look at history as a guide that we’ve been in these situations before. We have been here before as a country.

We absolutely have and we’ve overcome. And it wasn’t easy. It took time, it took struggle, but we overcame. I keep hearing these quotes from people saying that Donald Trump is turning the 1920 or the 2020 America into 1930 Germany. And I’m like, okay, but what you’re telling me is that you don’t actually look at the broader picture of history because in 1930s, Germany, Hitler, the genocidal psychopath, sent his lawyers to the United States to study America’s Jim Crow laws because he was fascinated with how effective the United States was in segregating black people in locking up indigenous people onto reservations. And Professor Whitman of Princeton University writes this in his book Hitler’s American Model, and he says that when Hitler’s lawyers returned back to Germany to report back to him, their report was that, Hey, we may be Nazis, but these Americans that are very extreme, we can’t go that far.

And so what I tell folks is that Trump isn’t reviving 1930s Germany. He’s reviving 1920s America. That’s what make America great again, has always meant is let’s go back to that Jim Crow era where black people were second class citizens, Asians were not allowed to immigrate. Women had no rights, no voting rights, no financial autonomy. That’s the America they want to go back to. And look, we overcame that America, it took struggle, it took time, it took effort, but we overcame. And so when you ask this really astute question, Craig, of what are we going to do? Well, I think we have lessons of history of how we get active and organized on the local level, play a significant role, a meaningful role on the local level and build from there. There’s no light switch we can flip that will fix it, but there are strategies that we can implement to move our country back in a direction of justice and compassion.

J. Craig Williams:

I mean, once people realized that the freeze on federal funds was going to have a direct effect on seniors and children, there was just a public outcry that I think resulted in the order being reversed. But with the order regarding Gu Tomino Bay being opened up now for migrants, are we repeating like manzanar here in California where we in turn Japanese, are we repeating Indian reservations? We learned,

Qasim Rashid:

You’re right. I mean it has echoes of executive order in 9 0 6 6 where a hundred thousand Japanese Americans were rounded up in camps. And I also remind folks that the Komatsu case, the Supreme Court then affirmed that ruling as well. And so it wasn’t just a failure on the presidential level, but also on the supreme court level. And I think that yes, in a way we are, and this is where my frustration rests with the opposition party is supposed to be the party that pushes back against this type of injustice. And it’s okay in my book to acknowledge the good work that President Obama and Biden did, but we also need to acknowledge where they failed because that’s what got us here in the first place. I was a young voter and I still remember President Obama running on shutting down Guantanamo Bay. He never did. I remember Biden talking about shutting down Guantanamo Bay. He never did. And now that is being used as a crutch by Trump to say, Hey, they had it open. They used it. I’m going to do the exact same thing. And what’s the argument at this point? It’s not as strong as it needs to be.

J. Craig Williams:

Does the argument really though, I hate to interrupt you, but does the argument need to be Republican and Democrat? Can it just be what’s right?

Qasim Rashid:

But that’s my point, Craig, that what’s right needs to be exemplified by somebody. There needs to be a leader, a party, a politician, a public servant who says, let me show you what right actually is. When both parties are capitulating to this idea that we need to circumvent the Constitution to set up this camp on foreign soil that we can keep prisoners in torture and solitary confinement, that is a fundamental problem because then the argument of what’s right becomes hypothetical and the argument of what is reality? And that’s the struggle. I mean, there’s a reason why Obama was called a deporter in chief. He deported more people in a single year than Trump ever did. Rather than solving the root causes of the crisis that are addressing them or finding a way to address them, we lost the messaging battle. We lost a practical battle.

And I’m reminded Craig, and you may have heard this quote before too, former Congressman John Dingle talks about this. I remember this is my very first day of law school. Professor Jack Price was our civil procedure professor, and he said that this John Dingle quote really defines civil procedure at all. He says, when it comes to the law, you write the substance, I’ll write the procedure and I’ll screw you every single time. And that’s kind of the world in which we are right now. The law says what we very clearly know, it says, but if the person applying it, applying what it means, applying its interpretation has malicious intent, then it doesn’t matter what the law says anymore. And that’s kind of the issue at this point. And so again, I make no sugarcoat about how serious the situation is, but I think the solution to us is clear is we need to have a meaningful opposition party that is not going to stand by and sugarcoat the gravity of the situation, will not sit there and try to appeal to right wing voters or politicians, but will actually be an opposition party and run on the values of justice and compassion, not just with rhetoric, but with meaningful policies, proposals, meaningful messaging and meaningful action.

J. Craig Williams:

Exactly. So we’re going to take another quick break to hear a word from our sponsors. We’ll be right back and welcome back to lawyer, lawyer. I’m back with Qasim Rashid, human rights lawyer, author, and former congressional candidate. We are talking about what’s right. And just as a little anecdote here, I’ve done a lot of trials in my time and I can’t tell you how many times I’ve ended a jury closing argument with, you know what’s right. You’ve been taught in school, you’ve been taught by your minister, your rabbi, your religious leaders. You’ve been taught in social circles, what’s right, do the right thing. And there’s a country that we’re looking at now that seems to be divided and it’s been divided by political parties, but it’s really a political party of the solution here. Or do we need to get back to a different perspective?

Qasim Rashid:

Well, I think Craig, the broader question is if a political party is not the solution, then what is the vehicle by which the people have their voices heard?

We are a representative democracy. We’re a democratic republic, which means that we are a nation that has decided that we will elect representatives to heed our voices and to do our bidding. And unfortunately, due to decisions like Citizens United Unlimited, dark money, corporate money, super PAC money has flowed into the political process completely drowning out what the average person wants. There are extraordinarily popular policies that are drowned out. 20 24, 70 7% of Democrats, 63% of independents, 61% of Republicans wanted the government to stop funding Netanyahu as he committed war crimes and by many credible accusations, genocide against the Palestinian people. And despite that, both parties were adamant that we are going to continue to arm him repenting universal healthcare. More than 70% of Americans want to ensure healthcare as a human right across the political spectrum, but yet we continue to entrench ourselves into this for-profit exploitative model.

I call them health corporations, health exploitation, limited liability corporations, climate justice. More than 60% of Americans want to have meaningful climate action. And instead we have a president who’s screaming drill, baby drill. And all of that is due to the fact that the politicians in power now are elected by and large, by lobbyists, by wealthy corporations, by billionaires. And these politicians know that if I don’t capitulate and do what these billionaires want me to do, I’m going to be primaried. I’m going to be voted out in the next election, so let me do what I can to limit the harm, but ultimately do what these corporations want me to do. That’s fundamentally the problem. And for us to overcome that, we’ll require a mass movement of people. I remind folks that in this last presidential election, the single, and this has been the case for many presidential elections before, but the single largest demographic of registered voters were people who did not vote. They could have all banded together for a third party candidate that we always hear about, and they could have elected a third party candidate. But that’s fundamentally the issue. And we can talk about voter suppression and we can talk about gerrymandering, and we should ultimately, what we’ve seen consistently across the board even before Citizens United is an apathy in the civic engagement process. And unfortunately, this is one of the end results of that apathy.

J. Craig Williams:

Let’s turn to some of the litigation that’s resulted as a consequence of these executive orders. We’ve got challenges to the birthright citizenship, and we’ve got challenges to schedule F, the changes for firing people. We’ve got challenges to the new governmental agency. Doge, let’s look, as you said before at the kind of broader picture here, immediately a federal judge put a hold on the funding freeze, and it’s a temporary hold as we all know. It’s an injunction, so there will be a hearing later on that may determine how it’s going to go one way or the other. It’s not out of the woods yet, but do we need to have a faster judicial system to deal with these kind of this constitutional crisis that we’re in right now?

Qasim Rashid:

We absolutely need to expand the court system. I think that’s a point that very few people disagree. I think the question is, do we expand the Supreme Court? My answer is yes. Do we expand it at least to 13? We have 13 federal districts. We should have 13 justices on the Supreme Court at a minimum. But on the local and state, and certainly on the district and circuit level, I would absolutely be in favor of expanding access to be more representative and more proportional to our growing population. The right to a speedy trial or right to speedy court hearing is not an opinion. I mean, it’s a constitutional promise. It’s a guarantee. It’s a protected right. And again, this goes back to my point earlier, the law can say whatever it says, but unless we act upon it, unless we apply a procedure to exemplify its application, then it’s just empty words. And so to your point, Craig, I think as an astute point, we absolutely need to expand the court system to ensure that we are expediting these issues and ensuring that as people’s rights are challenged or violated, they can get justice and protection in a meaningful way

J. Craig Williams:

Because justice delayed

Qasim Rashid:

It was justice denied.

J. Craig Williams:

Exactly right. Well, we’re supposed to have checks and balances, Congress versus the executive branch. If we can’t count on scotus, can we count on Congress?

Qasim Rashid:

Not right now, my friend. Unfortunately, we have a Congress that is in full control of a president who doesn’t believe in democracy. I think we’ve seen the memo sent out by the White House, the statements from his billionaire friends that anyone who does not get a board, the shop agenda is going to be primaried. But I don’t even even think we need to look at this example. We can look back to when he was in his first term open examples of corruption, of bribery, of violating the oath of office. The insurrection happened right in front of them. These senators literally saw the violence right in front of them. They saw a police officer being beaten. Several died due to the violence that day. They saw the chance to hang Mike Pence. They saw the attempts to kill Nancy Pelosi assassinate her. And despite all that, despite admitting that Donald Trump is practically and morally responsible for this insurrection, they still capitulated and cowardly put a party above principles, politics above the people.

And so unfortunately, I don’t think this Congress is capable. Someone made a comment at that time, I can’t remember who I wish I could attributed to them, but they said the founding fathers of this country, the George Washingtons, the James Madisons, the Thomas Jeffersons, they certainly contemplated a president like Donald Trump. They contemplated the possibility of a person coming to power who is corrupt and selfish and the antithesis of democracy. But what they didn’t contemplate is a complicit Congress. And that’s why we find ourselves in the crisis that we’re in right now. We have a president who doesn’t care about democracy and a Congress that is unfortunately complicit in his corruption

J. Craig Williams:

And scotus,

Qasim Rashid:

Right? I mean, but I think SCOTUS is ultimately a reflection, this broader cancer of congressional corruption of corporate money in politics. We can look back and see the stolen seats, the McConnell doctrine of not appointing a new status during presidential terms, but apparently that only applies to Democrats. And again, I say this as someone who’s been a democratic nominee for Congress and still campaigns for Democrats and donates to Democrats, I share that just to let folks know that I’m not here to play Monday morning quarterback. I’m in the thick of the fight right now. But when we had a filibuster proof majority, when we had even a majority in the Senate, we didn’t abolish the Jim Crow filibuster and passed these critical pieces of legislation that could have prevented this crisis. And I think it’s important that voters and folks understand that this is not that we were just sitting here, helpless, had no power, no control, and something happened to us. It’s also that unfortunately, we don’t have the meaningful opposition party needed to keep those checks and balances in place. And that recognition is crucial because we’ve already lost to a fascist twice in three terms, and if we have any hope of winning back the White House or the Senate or the House in the future, it’s going to require some bold and courageous steps to do what’s right as opposed to pretend that the Republicans are following some magical playbook they have in their mind.

J. Craig Williams:

What advice do you give to these folks that are impacted by these executive orders?

Qasim Rashid:

Well, and I’ve written about this on my newsletter, let’s address this with Qasim Rashid. First of all, especially if you’re an immigrant or an undocumented immigrant, contact an attorney and have an attorney on standby that’s going to be critical. If you’re approached by ice, unless they have a criminal arrest warrant signed by a federal judge, you do not need to go with them and under no circumstance, you need to speak with them. Tell them that you will contact your attorney and your attorney will do all the talking for you. For those in healthcare, look, there’s a reason why I’m in Illinois because we have a governor that I don’t always agree with, but he has made it clear that he’s going to protect healthcare access, and that’s a critical part of the lives that my family and I need to get by. So think about where you are physically and then ultimately it’s easier to give up.

But what we need right now are folks who are going to stay engaged, and you don’t need to spend tons of money. You don’t need to go knock on every door out there. Just do one thing, and that is get involved locally. And I promise you, if you get involved locally and you are consistent, then you will only see meaningful change in your local community, but you will become a positive beacon for your circle of influence and bring more folks involved, and you’ll be amazed how much of a difference you can make just by being consistent and being involved on the local level.

J. Craig Williams:

Great. Well, tell us about the Qasim Rashid Show. Where can we find it?

Qasim Rashid:

Sure. Yeah. No, I am on Channel 1 26 on SiriusXM. The show airs every Sunday at 10:00 AM Eastern, and it’s also posted on every Monday on my Substack. Let’s address this with Qasim Rashid. It’s just my website, Qasim rashid.com, and I make it a point to keep my content accessible. You can become a paid subscriber if you’d like, but I just have a policy against paywall and content. And so whether you’re a freer or a paid subscriber, you get access to all the same content, and my goal is to address these critical human rights issues that impact us that unfortunately, corporate media, legacy media does not cover. It’s great to connect with leaders like you, Craig, who do address these issues because in my view, this is the kind of advocacy we need more of.

J. Craig Williams:

Qasim, thank you very much for being on the show today. It’s been a pleasure

Qasim Rashid:

Pleasures been mine. Thank you, Craig.

J. Craig Williams:

Well, here are a few of my thoughts about today’s topic. If you can, I’ve already figured out what I think about it. Obviously, we need to send Mr. Smith back to Washington, and by that I mean the old movie Mr. Smith goes to Washington starring Jimmy Stewart. Maybe it’s a good watch at this point. A little soft in the heart sometimes, but I think at this point in time, our nation needs a little bit of heart and understanding. Well, that’s it for my rant on today’s topic. Let me know what you think. If you’d like what you heard today, please rate us on Apple Podcasts or your favorite podcasting app. You can also visit us@legaltalknetwork.com, where you can sign up for our newsletter. I’m Craig Williams. Thanks for listening. Please join us next time for another great legal topic. Remember, when you want legal thank Lawyer 2 Lawyer.

Announcer:

Thanks for listening to Lawyer 2 Lawyer produced by the broadcast professionals at Legal Talk Network. Subscribe to the RSS feed on legal talk network.com or in iTunes. The views expressed by the participants of this program are their own and do not represent the views of nor are they endorsed by Legal Talk Network, its officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, shareholders, and subsidiaries. None of the content should be considered legal advice. As always, consult a lawyer.

Continue Reading