►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Well,
welcome
everybody.
Thank
you
for
joining
us
for
privileged
confidentiality
and
transparency.
For
this
session
we
are
thrilled
to
have
john
heining.
As
our
speaker
john,
is
staff
chair
on
ncso
executive
committee
and
a
member
of
our
redistricting
and
election
standing
committee
for
his
normal
day.
A
Also,
I
want
to
thank
john
and
the
texas
legislative
council
for
loaning
us
their
red
apple
computers
for
those
of
you
who
joined
us
in
providence
and
columbus.
For
the
previous
redistricting
seminars,
we
used
the
texas
laptops
to
conduct
our
redistricting
simulation
exercise
now
for
the
upcoming
cycle.
We
think
texas
is
the
only
state
that
will
use
its
own
software,
but
if
anyone
in
the
audience
knows
differently,
we
would
love
to
know
about
it
also
keep
in
mind
that
anyone
who
can't
get
their
answers
in
this
session
please
come
and
join.
A
B
Hello:
everyone.
Yes,
my
name
is
john
heining.
I
am
the
ledge
counsel,
the
general
counsel
for
the
ledge
council,
lots
of
lots
of
councils
in
there
so-
and
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
point
out
here-
is
that
michael
lee,
who
you
might
have
seen
from
a
previous
presentation
I,
while
we
were
doing
some
preparatory
work
earlier
this
week,
he
pointed
out
that
my
very
first
slide
had
a
typo,
and
I
I
really
appreciated
pointing
that
out
for
me.
So
so
I'm
gonna
fix
it
for
you
here.
B
Let's
see,
yep
you're,
just
you're,
just
gonna
get
sued
right.
So
who
am
I?
Who
am
I?
I
am
the
general
counsel
for
the
the
legislative
agency.
That
is
basically
the
the
the
swiss
army
knife
of
the
legislature.
We
provide
bill
drafting,
but
about
two-thirds
of
our
budget
and
more
than
half
of
our
employees
are
dedicated
to
providing
it
support
to
the
legislature.
B
We
also
support
the
red
redistricting
function
for
the
texas
legislature,
so
we
have
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
different
roles
here
and
so
then,
the
next
question
that
we
have
is
you
know
who
do
you
work
for?
Well,
I
have
182
clients,
I
have
150
house
of
representatives,
representatives
from
the
house
and
31
senators.
I
also
have
a
very
big
dot
there,
who
is
the
lieutenant
governor,
and
so
I
have
a
relationship
with
each
one
of
those.
B
Although
the
agency,
as
itself,
it
actually
represents
the
entire
legislature
as
a
whole,
so
I
have
relationships
with
182
different
offices,
but
I
also
work
for
the
body
as
a
whole
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
wanted
to
point
out.
One
of
the
things
I
want
to
remind
you
guys
you
all
work
in
legislatures,
so
you
know
this
is
that
legislatures
are
unique.
We
each
have
our
own
processes,
we
don't
each
have
our
own
style.
B
We
each
have
our
own
ways
of
doing
things
and
so
and
we
each
have
our
own
relationships
with
with
the
the
minority
party,
the
majority
party,
the
different
caucuses.
So
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
you
know
I'm
going
to
try
and
make
this
as
applicable
to
everybody
as
I
possibly
can,
but
your
mileage
is
going
to
vary.
Please
please,
please.
B
If
I
tell
you
something-
or
I
suggest
something,
it's
probably
a
good
idea,
because
I
said
it,
but
I
want
you
to
make
sure
and
check
with
somebody
in
your
state,
in
the
texas
legend
in
your
legislature
or
in
your
office
before
you
try
and
adopt
that
policy.
B
So
what
are
we
talking
about
here
today?
Well,
we're
we're
talking
about
privilege.
What
is
a
privilege,
it's
a
right
that
allows
a
person
to
resist
compulsory
discord
and
disclosure
of
information,
and
there
are
a
lot
of
different
privileges
in
the
law.
For
example,
you
have
a
spousal
privilege
right
where
a
spouse
can't
testify
against
the
other
spouse
in
a
criminal
dispute.
B
You
can
have
a
ministerial
privileges
with
the
idea
that
a
minister
or
a
priest
can't
testify
against
somebody
that
they're
ministering
to,
and
the
idea
is
that
these
privileges
exist
because
of
their
societal
benefit,
and
so
one
of
the
things
that
we're
not
going
to
be
talking
about,
though,
is
some
other
privileges.
We're
not
going
to
be
talking
about
executive
or
deliberative
process
privilege
as
the
name
connotes.
That's
really
has
to
do
with
the
executive
branch
and
it's
generally
not
going
to
be
available
to
legislators
or
legislative
staff.
B
The
legal
work
product
privilege
really
only
kicks
in
when
litigation
actually
starts,
and
this
presentation
is
really
for
for
those
for
you
folks
to
set
yourself
in
the
best
way
possible
before
litigation
starts,
and
then
also
you
know
we're
not
talking
about
other
laws.
My
state,
for
example,
makes
all
constituent
communications
completely
confidential
from
a
public
information
law
standpoint.
That's
not
what
we're
talking
about
here,
we're
talking
about
legislative
privilege
and
attorney
client
privilege
and
how
those
apply
and
how
you
can
maintain
them.
B
One
of
the
things
that
I
wanted
to
point
out
about
legislative
privilege,
especially,
is
that
this
is
an
ancient
concept,
going
all
the
way
back
to
the
very
foundation
of
parliaments
and
when
we
had
the
concept
that
you
had
to
have
somebody
representing
the
people,
in
addition
to
the
king
right,
and
so
this
is
a
painting
here
from
sixth
well,
the
painting
wasn't
made
in
1641,
but
it
depicts
a
a
scene
from
1641
where
charles
the
fourth
first,
he
is
entering
parliament-
and
you
know
charles
the
first,
because
he's
got
this
big,
floppy
hat
and
so
basically
what's
happening
here
is
that
there
are
five
members
of
the
english
parliament
who
are
are
basically
committing
all
kinds
of
seditious
acts,
they're
plotting
against
the
king
and
against
his
wife,
and
so
they
have
so
he's
stomped
into
parliament
with
his
minute
arms
and
he
is
demanding
that
they
be
turned
over
to
him.
B
What
he
didn't
know
at
the
time
is
that
the
five
parliamentarian
parliamentarians
who
had
they
were
looking
for
had
snuck
out
back,
but
the
that
doesn't
change
the
fact
that
he
came
in
and
he
demanded
he
said,
turn
these
guys
over
to
me.
The
guy
kneeling
at
his
feet
is
the
speaker
of
parliament,
and
he
made
an
incredibly
brave
speech
where
he
said.
B
Look
the
only
duty
that
I
have
is
to
the
other
members
of
parliament
in
this
room,
and
I
have
now
shared
with
you
all
the
information
that
they
have
authorized
me
to
share
with
you
and
so
that
right
there
you
have
parliament
establishing
itself
formally
establishing
itself
before
the
king,
that
they
are
independent
and,
as
it
turns
out,
those
five
parliamentarians
were
definitely
engaged
in
acts
of
sedition
against
the
king.
It
did
not
go
well
for
charles
the
first.
B
He
ends
up
ended
up,
as
you
can
see
from
this
painting
things
he
he
met.
He
his
life
was
somewhat
shortened,
and
this
idea
of
parliamentary
independence
of
the
independence
of
the
legislature
has
continued
to
this.
To
this
very
day.
In
fact,
we're
going
to
be
seeing
in
the
next
few
weeks,
I
believe
the
queen's
speech
at
the
beginning
of
the
queen's
speech
the
queen,
who
has
never
entered,
entered
parliament
again
since
1641
sends
her
servant
down
there.
B
B
The
idea
here
is
that
parliament,
every
year
when
they
are
when,
when
the
queen
is
going
to
give
her
speech
every
year,
they
are
demonstrating
their
independence
from
the
executive,
and
so
that
concept
has
been
has
been
continued
and
it
has
been
reduced
to
writing
in
both
the
federal
constitution
and
also
most
state
constitutions.
B
Here's
the
the
speech
or
debate
clause
from
the
texas
constitution
that
you
can
say
see,
and
basically
it
says
no
members
shall
be
questioned
in
any
other
place
for
words,
spoken
debate
in
either
house
and
that
privilege
has
been
or
that
that
concept
has
been
expanded
to
apply
to
what
we
know
in
the
modern
era
as
legislative
privilege.
So
what
is
legislative
privilege?
What
do
you
have
to
show
if
you're
going
to
try
and
assert
legislative
privilege?
B
Well,
it
applies
to
information,
okay,
so
any
anything
written
down
anything
on
your
cell
phone,
anything
any
any
of
the
communications
that
you
have
that
is
given
or
held
in
confidence
among
legislators
or
staff
for
the
furtherance
of
a
legislative
purpose,
okay,
and
that
individual
privilege.
One
thing
to
remember
is
that
it
is
held
by
the
individual
legislator.
They
are
the
ones
who
can
wave
it
or
decide
to
decide
to
assert
it.
Another
legislator
cannot
waive
that
privilege
on
their
behalf.
B
So
what
a
lot
of
folks
who
work
outside
of
legislatures
they?
What
they
kind
of
think
of
here
when
they
hear
of
legislative
privilege,
is
that
that
dark,
smart
smoke-filled
room.
I
think
of
it
more
of
like
a
jazz
band
rehearsal
right
now.
I
would
never
compare
myself
to
duke
ellington
or
sonny
greer
or
billy
straghorn,
as
you
see
depicted
here,
but
what
I
would
absolutely
say
is
that
in
this
rehearsal,
that
is
that
this
photograph
is
taking,
they
are,
are
having
the
freedom.
They
have.
B
The
freedom
in
the
in
the
in
this
rehearsal
to
explore
and
explore
some
bad
ideas,
and
some
good
ideas
make
some
bad
notes
and
being
able
to
rehearse
like
this
and
do
things
out
of
the
public
eye,
allows
for
creativity
and
frankness,
whereas,
if
they're
performing
on
stage
man,
they
gotta
go
so,
and
one
of
the
other
issues
that
that
often
is
an
issue
related
to
legislative
privilege
is
that
you
often
have
questions,
and
you
also
have
requests
for
for
policy
outcomes,
those
requests
or
opinions
or
questions,
just
because
they're
asked
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
that
is
the
the
intent
of
the
legislature
that
the
legislature
is
intending
to
act
in
any
particular
way.
B
A
lot
of
that
information
can
be
taken
out
of
context
and
bad
acts
can
be
imputed
for
mere
questions
or
mere
opinions,
and
really
my
idea
here
is
that
legislative
privilege,
it's
all
about
holding
folks
responsible,
holding
legislatures
responsible
for
the
notes
they
play,
not
for
the
notes
that
they
just
thought
about
playing.
B
So
I'm
going
to
play
a
little
game
with
you
here.
Let's
see
if
I
can
get
this
up
here,
this
one
right
there,
okay,
so
so
I
wanna
ask
you
gonna,
ask
you
some
questions
here,
and
I
want
you
to
tell
me
in
the
chat
here.
If
you
think
something
is
privileged
or
or
not
legislatively
privileged
or
not
so
the
first
one
here
is
going
to
be
giving
a
highly
defamatory
speech
from
the
well
of
the
senate.
What
do
y'all
think
legislator
privileged
or
not.
B
Yes,
wendy
is
first
in
and
she
is
absolutely
correct.
Well,
no,
I'm
sorry!
No,
it
is
actually
no.
I
see
I
would
disagree,
giving
a
highly
defamatory
speech
in
the
world
of
senate,
assuming
that
you
know
you're
making
defamatory
statements,
but
it
has
to
do
with
the
the
legislative
business,
the
business
of
the
legislature
and
assuming,
of
course,
you
know,
you're,
you
can
say.
B
Things
in
the
in
the
context
of
passing
a
bill
as
long
as
you're
as
long
as
those
things
are
being
said
in
the
well
of
the
senate
for
a
legislative
purpose,
that's
almost
certainly
going
to
be
subject
to
legislative
privilege.
In
fact,
that's
the
very
core
of
legislative
privilege.
Now
what.
B
B
Right
and
so
that's
exactly
right,
that's
and
this
is
the
concept
of
alter
ego
right.
You
know,
if
anything,
that
the
legislator
can
do
the
the
legislative
staffer
if
they're
acting
on
behalf
of
the
legislature
of
the
legislator,
they
can
do
that.
So
the
next
one
here.
What
about
a
newsletter
about
that
speech.
B
B
B
Yeah,
that's
a
great
eileen!
You!
You
win
the
prize
this
time.
Yes,
absolutely
again,
policy
development.
You
know
you're
not
on
the
senate
floor,
but
policy
development
is
absolutely
critical
to
the
legislative
process.
So
it's
going
it.
That
is
absolutely
going
to
be
privileged.
So
let's
do
the
next
one
here:
how
about
records
of
fraud
committed
by
a
member
against
the
government?
B
That's
exactly
right,
michelle
no
from
louisiana!
In
fact,
a
substantial
amount
of
case
law
unfortunately
has
to
do
with
congressmen
from
louisiana
who
had
attempted
to
to
assert
legislative
privilege
with
regard
to
records
of
fraud
that
they
committed
against
the
u.s
government
and
then
what
about
a
speaker's
request
of
a
bad
parking
spot
for
a
disfavored
member
here
right,
you
have
speakers
unhappy
with
a
member
and
so
he's
telling
he's
ordering
the
sergeant-at-arms
to
to
give
that
member
a
bad
parking
spot.
What
do
you.
B
Think
right,
that's
exactly
right!
They
when
we're
talking
about
administrative
acts,
legislative
privilege
does
not
apply.
B
Similarly,
your
discriminatory
justification
for
terminating
an
employee
is
not
going
to
be
privileged
because
it
falls
into
that
administrative
exception
and
now
the
one
caveat
that
I
would
add
to
that,
though,
is
that,
if
you're
talking
about
you
know,
let's
say
you
want
to
give
an
employee
a
a
raise,
and
so
your
your
the
the
raise
is
not
going
to
be
legislatively
privileged,
but
maybe
the
specific
advice
that
that
the
employee
gave
you
that
got
you
out
of
the
tight
spot.
B
Well,
you
know
that
that
would
likely
still
be
legislatively
privileged
right
one
more
a
couple
more
here:
what
about
a
legislator?
Communicating
communicating
with
an
activist
regarding.
B
Yeah,
it's
not
on
the
floor
right
and,
unfortunately,
you
have
to
be
very,
very
careful
with
this.
Almost
certainly
communications
with
a
member
of
the
public
or
a
lobbyist
are
not
going
to
be
subject
to
legislative
privilege.
This
can
be
a
specific
issue
with
regard
to
redistricting,
especially
congressional
redistricting,
where
you
know
you
have
some
very
important
people
who
have
opinions
about
where
the
lines
need
to
be
drawn,
and
usually
you
can't
assert
legislative
privilege
when
you
have
the
conversations
with
those
guys
or
gals.
B
Yep,
that's
exactly
right
and
mere
fact
is
not
going
to
be.
Thank
you
eileen
from
kansas.
She,
the
the
the
mere
facts,
mirror
just
information
is
not
gonna,
be
you
can't
apply
legislative
privilege
to
that.
So
the
mere
fact
that
the
senator
ducked
in
into
a
a
water
closet,
that's.
B
Not
it,
you
can't
walk
out
and
say
no
sorry
that
was
legislatively
privileged.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
playing
that
game,
and
so
what
you
can
see
here
is
kind
of
what
the
the
way
legislative
privilege
kind
of
works
here.
B
The
the
the
the
idea
here
is
that
the
closer
to
that
you
are
when
you're
committing
some
sort
of
act
or
you
have
some
sort
of
information,
the
closer
that
you
are
to
speaking
on
the
chamber
floor
about
legisla
about
legislation
about
the
policy
of
your
state,
that's
where
that's
the
very
core
of
legislative
privilege
and
as
you
get
out
further
and
further
further
away
from
that,
the
more
difficult
it
is
to
assert
that
so
developing
policy
well,
of
course,
you're
developing
the
policy
of
your
office.
B
So
you
can
go
speak
on
the
chamber
floor,
so
it's
going
to
be
privileged
constituent
communications.
Almost
definitely
not
the
only
you
can
have
some
exam
exceptions
there.
For
example,
if
you
are
conducting,
if
you're
have
a
committee
that
is
conducting
a
legislative
investigation
yeah,
you
can
probably
the
the
information
that
you're
sharing
that
shared
with
the
constituent
about
that.
B
That's
probably
going
to
be
privileged
and
like
we
were
talking
about
administrative
and
employment
actions
are
not
going
to
be
privileged
and
then
criminal,
political
and
private
activity,
and
then
also
facts
they're
right
out
and
then
the
other
sort
of
way
that
you
can
see
that
and
see
this
work,
and
these
two
work
in
tandem
is
that
the
closer
you
are
to
being
a
legislator,
the
more
easy
more
easily
that
you
can
assert
legislative
privilege.
So
legislators,
of
course,
that's
the
purpose
of
the
whole
thing.
B
Personal
staff
they
very
well
are
likely
are
the
the
alter
egos
of
the
legislature
chamber
staff,
legislative
agencies,
staff.
They
still
can
assert
legislative
privilege.
The
the
only
issue,
though,
is
that
you
have
to
do
a
little
bit
more
work
to
demonstrate
that
you
are
acting
as
the
alter
ego
of
the
legislature
when
you're
engaging
in
that
act.
I
am
drafting
a
bill
for
the
legislator.
I
am
giving
legal
advice
to
the
legislator,
I
about
policy.
I
am
engaged
in
a
legislative
act.
B
You
know
legislative
purpose,
so
one
of
the
concepts
that
I
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
you're
aware
of
is
the
concept
of
waiver.
So
a
waiver
can
be
done
in
a
number
of
different
ways,
but
the
idea
here
is
that
you
have
a
privilege,
but
you
you
give
it
up
for
one
reason
or
another:
you
have
a
right,
but
you
give
it
up.
So
the
the
way
that
I
like
to
see
waivers
done
if
they're
going
to
be
done,
is
the
affirmative
waiver.
B
You
know
you
sign
something
that
says
and
you,
after
you've
consulted
with
your
attorneys
consulted
with
with
your
staff,
you
signed
something
saying
I
wave
privilege
you
can
also
have
an
agent
if
they
have
permission
to
do
it
wave
a
legislator,
privilege
right.
Thankfully,
thankfully,
that's
that's
kind
of
an
aspect
of
legislative
privilege.
B
Unfortunately,
one
of
the
main
reasons
that
legislative
privilege
is
waived
is
by
conduct,
and
that
means,
if
you
make
something
public
or
you
make,
or
you
indicate
in
some
way,
that
you
are
waiving
the
privilege
of
those
documents
and
we'll
talk
about
that
in
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
later
here
by
your
conduct,
you
can
waive
your
privileges
as
well,
so
how
does
it
work
when
you
are
being
sued
in
state
court?
The
great
thing
is
that
it's
usually
very
powerful
in
some
states,
not
so
much
but
most
states.
B
The
legislative
privilege
is
extremely
powerful.
You
just
you.
If
you
are
able
to
meet
the
the
the
criteria
for
legislative
privilege,
you'll
be
able
to
successfully
assert
it
and
not
disclose
the
the
information
that
is
being
sought.
B
However,
in
federal
litigation,
legislative
privilege
is
a
common
law
privilege
and
there
are
several
supreme
court
cases
that
indicta
seem
to
establish
a
very
strong
legislative
privilege,
but
it's
indicta.
It's
there's,
no,
it's
not
binding,
and
so
the
courts
in
an
effort
to
to
give
effect
to
to
the
supremacy
clause
of
the
federal
constitution
and
and
of
federal
statutes.
For
example,
the
voting
rights
act-
they
have
qualified
this
privilege
very
substantially.
B
In
fact,
what
you
almost
always
will
end
up
dealing
with
is
a
balancing
test
that
you
have
to
satisfy
in
order
to
assert
privilege
successfully,
and
I
hate
these
things.
The
reason
why
is
because,
if
you're
dealing
with
one
of
these
balancing
tests,
you
pretty
much
already
lost
and
I'll
walk
you
through
here
and
I'll,
show
you
why
the
first
the
first,
so
this
is
a
very
common
one
here,
rodriguez
versus
pataki
this,
so
the
first
element
here
is
the
relevance
of
the
evidence
thought
to
be
protected.
B
Well,
if
a
party
is
seeking
irrelevant
information,
you
can
stop
there.
So
already,
if
we're
talking
about
a
legislative
privilege,
balancing
test
we're
already
past
the
relevance
standard
right,
it's
already
probably
relevant
the
availability
of
other
evidence
overwhelmingly.
If
we're
talking
about
a
bill
that
is
passed
by
the
legislature,
the
legislature
overwhelmingly
overwhelmingly
is
the
only
body
that
knows
why
the
bill
passed
or
how
it
passed
or
has
any
information
with
regard
to
that.
So
it's
not
really
available
anywhere
else.
B
So
knockout
number
two
number
three,
the
seriousness
of
the
litigation,
the
issues
involved.
Well,
if
we're
in
court,
it's
probably
serious
and
then
similarly,
if
we're
talking
about
something,
that's
governed
by
the
voting
rights
act,
it's
super
serious
right.
This
is
a
fundamental
aspect
of
government
of
who's
going
to
represent
us
right,
and
so,
if
I
it's
that's,
absolutely
going
to
be
serious,
so
then
the
fourth
one
is
the
role
of
government
litigation.
Well,
the
legislature
passed
the
statute.
A
B
Four
of
those
things
they're
they're
already
built
in
that
we're
in
that
the
balancing
test
is
going
to
go
against
the
legislature
as
far
as
disclosing
information.
What
I
love,
though,
is
the
fifth
one:
the
possibility
of
future
timidity
by
government
employees
who
will
be
forced
to
recognize
that
their
secrets
are
viable.
B
Thank
you
thank
you
for
considering
my
feelings
judge,
but
the
thing
is,
though,
as
I
already
see
that
it's
four
to
one
and
so
you're
going
to
you're
you're
gonna
go
with
the
party.
That's
disclosed
asking
for
disclosure,
so
thanks
a
lot
what's
more.
The
other
issue
that
you
really
have
to
remember,
too,
is
the
the
the
remedy
for
the
discovery
dispute.
B
B
As
I
said,
the
legislature
probably
has
all
the
information
that's
necessary
to
prove
whether
or
not
a
statute
is,
is
legal
or
not,
or
if
there
was
an
intent
to
to
discriminate.
Remember
section
three
of
the
voting
rights
act.
Still
has
an
intentional
discrimination
element
to
it,
but
then
the
other
side
of
that
is
the
legislature.
Legislator
discloses
everything.
Well,
that's
not
fair
to
legislator
right,
so
the
court's
not
really
going
to
want
to
make
that
sort
of
decision.
What
they're
going
to
do
what
I
would
prefer
that
they
do.
B
What
I
wish
they
would
do
is
that
the
judge
would
take
it
in
for
review
themselves.
They'd,
say:
judge
asked
for
all
the
information,
that's
one
that
has
been
requested
by
the
plaintiff.
Usually
the
plaintiff
and
they're
going
to
review
it
all
and
then
decide
what's
privileged
and
then
hand
that
information
over
to
the
plan.
B
That's
not
gonna
happen,
though,
because
there
are
thousands
and
thousands
of
records,
thousands
of
emails,
all
kind
of
hundreds
of
maps
that
are
going
to
be
considered,
and
so
they're
not
going
to
be,
is
they're
not
going
to
be
really
the
the
court
didn't
have
enough
people
to
really
look
at
this
right.
B
So
the
most
likely
scenario
here,
that's
going
to
happen
is
that
they
are
just
going
to
the
court
is
going
to
require
the
legislature
or
the
legislator
to
disclose
the
information
to
the
to
the
other
party
and
and
then,
when
the
other
party
attempts
to
introduce
that
evidence
that
information
as
evidence
into
trial,
then
the
legislator,
the
legislature,
can
invoke
privilege
and
say
no,
that's
privileged,
that's
not
appropriate
and
then
that
five-star
five-part
step
gets
applied.
B
So
what
I
want
to
point
out
here
is
that
we've
gone
from
a
fundamental
right,
a
fundamental
basic
concept
of
legislative
independence.
Paintings
are
made
about
this
thing,
all
the
way
down
to
something
that's
like
slightly
more
than
the
hearsay
exception
in
a
in
a
trial.
B
Right
now
I
will
say
here
that
overwhelmingly
what
happens
is
that
the
plaintiffs
are
required
to
maintain
anything
that
they
receive
from
the
legislature
in
confidence
if
legislative
privilege
is
being
invoked,
so
you
got
that
so
here
we
are
right
in
state
court,
very
powerful
federal
court.
Not
so
much
so
is
it
even
worth
trying
to
assert
legislative
privilege
when
you're
talking
about
a
voting
rights
act
issue?
Yes,
yes,.
A
It
is
the
first.
B
Thing
is
that,
as
has
been
discussed
numerous
times
in
the
past
few
days,
state
constitutions
have
requirements
that
you
can
get
sued
in
state
court,
for
so
you
might
end
up
in
state
court,
in
which
case
the
legislative
privilege
is
very
powerful
on
the
other
side
of
things.
If
you
do
go
to
federal
court
well,
you
know
sometimes
the
the
judge
buys
it.
B
So,
let's
talk
about
attorney,
client,
privilege
elements
of
military
client
privilege.
I
want
to
point
out
here
how
much
narrower
it
is.
It
applies
to
a
communication
right.
It's
not
information,
it's
not
everything!
That's
in
your
office,
it's
only
communications
that
are
given
in
confidence
again
very
similar
to
the
legislative
privilege
that
has
to
be
between
an
attorney
and
a
client
right,
so
somebody
that
has
a
license
and
their
client.
B
Somebody
with
that
has
that
that
attorney-client
relationship
with
them-
and
it's
only
about
legal
advice
and
services
now
the
thing
about
the
attorney-client
privilege
is
that
it
is
very
familiar
to
judges.
Judges
see
this
issue
all
the
time
and
so
they're
very
comfortable
with
it.
They
perceive
the
attorney-client
privilege
as
being
fundamental
to
the
practice
of
law
right,
so
so
they're
very
amenable
and
familiar
with
these
concepts
legislative
privilege
a
lot
of
the
time
legislative
judges
who
are
dealing
with
legislative
privilege
issues,
it's
the
first
time,
they've
really
ever
thought
about
it.
B
So
attorney
client
privilege
is
limited.
We
talked
a
little
bit
about
this.
It
is
narrower
just
like
with
legislative
privilege,
factual
information
and
the
crime
fraud.
Exception
applies.
B
Some
might
argue
that
it's
far
less
textually
based
in
the
federal
constitution,
but
that
doesn't
matter
because
judges
are
familiar
with
it
and
they,
like
it
very
much,
and
so
they're
gonna
they're
gonna
go
with
it,
and
this
also
means,
then,
because
this
is
something
that
is
accepted
and
is
very
powerful
in
all
courts.
B
The
remedy
is
gonna,
be
that
the
plaintiff,
the
party
who's
asking
for
for
the
information
is
definitely
going
to
get
nothing
unless
you've
waved
and
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
waiver
in
a
second
here
I
see
there's
a
question
from
aaron.
If
I
haven't
answered
your
question
yet,
then
I
will
definitely
talk
about
this
in
just
a
few
minutes.
Okay,
so
practical
considerations
about
trying
to
maintain
your
privileges.
B
The
first
thing
that
I
would
ask
you-
and
this
is
something
that
really
you
you
can
think
about,
and
you
can
do
something
about
right
now,
so
ask
yourself:
do
you
have
the
resources
to
deal
with
this?
Often
when
you're
dealing
with
discovery,
it's
on
a
very
compressed
discovery
schedule,
I
can
give
you
an
example.
B
This
was
in
the
days
of
section
five,
but
I
was
given
three
days
to
produce
literally
3
500
documents
and
produce
a
a
a
privileged
log,
and
this
this
is
a
single
entry
from
from
our
privilege
log
to
to
so
produce
a
privilege
log
for
all
3
000
documents
that
didn't
work
out
so
well.
B
We
were
just
we
were
completely
unprepared
for
for
those
kinds
of
deadlines,
so
I
suggest
you
to
really
make
sure
that
you
that
you
do
your
best
to
make
sure
that
you
have
the
hands
on
deck
to
be
able
to
deal
with
that.
Similarly,
I
ask
questions:
like
you
know:
do
you
have
the
ways
of
sharing
information
with
your
with
your
attorneys?
B
Do
you
have
ways
of
of,
and
what
I'm
talking
about,
is
the
the
massive
amounts
of
information
that
you'll
be
able
to
you'll
have
to
to
exchange
between
you
and
your
attorneys
to
be
able
to
make
the
arguments
that
are
applied
to
the
voting
rights
act.
Similarly,
do
you
know
how
it
works?
B
Make
sure
that
you
know
how
to
export
things
and
maintain
the
metadata
one
of
the
requirements
for
discovery
is
that
you
will
be
required
in
in
in
discovery
to
turn
over,
not
just
your
email,
but
all
of
the
related
metadata
so
make
sure
and
think
about
how
you
would
export
that
type
of
thing
and
provide
it
to
whomever
to
review.
Ideally,
you
won't
have
to
disclose
it,
but
you
know
there's
a
good
chance.
B
You
you'll
have
to
disclose
something
also
one
of
the
things
that,
if
I
can,
if
you
kick
one
thing
away
from
all
this,
if
I
could
just
ask
you
to
think
about
who
your
email
or
your
text
messages
are
automatically
forwarding
to
please
think
about
how
those
things
are
set
up,
because
the
reason
why
is
that,
if
you
are
receiving
attorney
client
information
as
a
client-
and
you
are
forwarding
information
to
somebody
outside
your
office
or
somebody,
even
within
your
office
who
shouldn't
be
receiving
this
information,
you
very
likely
have
waived
your
attorney,
client
privilege
and
the
same
thing
goes
for
legislative
privilege
if
you're
forwarding
your
your
legislative
documents
or
forwarding
things
to
consultants
or
lobbyists
or
whatever,
whatever
whatever.
B
However,
you
have
your
system
work
set
up
if
you're
automatically
doing
that
for
and
for
everything,
you
need
to
be
very
concerned
about
that
waiver
by
conduct
issue.
So
please,
please,
please,
check
and
make
sure
that
you
know
how
those
forwarding
options
work
on
your
email
and
your
other
devices.
B
Another
issue
that
I'd
really
like
you
to
think
about,
and
this
this
can
be
a
little
bit
sensitive.
But
who
does
your
attorney
work
for
so
obviously?
Ideally,
if
you're
a
legislative
attorney,
you
are
going
to
be
represented
in
court
by
a
litigator
and
who
does
that
litigator
work
for
to
just
give
you
an
example
of
from
my
own
practice
here.
B
Our
attorney
general
represents
our
our
legislature,
the
speaker
and
lieutenant
governor
and
in
the
the
various
different
redistricting
committees
in
defending
the
the
bill
right
defending
their
their
redistricting
bill.
What
I
always
request
is
that
I
get
a
different
attorney
from
the
attorneys
that
are
assigned
to
to
the
leadership,
and
you
know
I
always
thought
I
was
like
you
know.
I
have
no
doubt
they're
cracker
jack
and
they're
fantastic
and
they're
excellent,
but
my
interests
as
a
legislative
agency
are
somewhat
different
than
the
interests
of
legislative
leadership.
B
The
commitment
to
defending
the
bill
is
different
right.
I
have
duties
in
duties
with
respect
to
all
182
of
my
clients.
They
have
duties
to
with
respect
to
their
constituents
and
the
reasons
why
they
got
elected,
and
so
I
always
ask
hey:
can
you
just
give
me
my
own
attorney
and
almost
always,
what
ends
up
happening
is
that
we
get
assigned
an
attorney
from
like
the
bankruptcy
division,
or
you
know,
family
law
or
whatever,
fine,
because
they're
litigators,
and
I
can
tell
them
the
things
that
I
need
them
to
know
about.
B
We're
talking
about
basic
process
issues
and
also
defending
the
privileges,
defending
making
sure
the
documents
that
we
generated,
that
we
put
together
for
our
clients
remain
privileged,
so
and
the
other
part
and
one
one
other
thing
to
think
about
too,
is
that
it
also
avoids
the
judge
being
confused
when
they
say
well,
you
know
here
I
am
and
I'm
representing
the
the
speaker
on
this
issue
and
then
we're
going
to
turn
around
in
five
minutes
later.
B
Well
now
I'm
representing
the
legislative
council
on
this
issue,
it's
very
difficult
for
the
judge
to
keep
straight
who's
a
party
and
which
side
whose
side
everybody
is
on
and
all
that
type
of
thing
have
a
different
face
to
represent
you
if
you
can
and
then
on
top
of
that
one
of
the
things
that
I
want
you
want
you
to
to
impress
upon.
You,
too,
is
that
almost
always
these
litigation
attorneys
that
are
going
to
be
representing
us.
They
tend
not
to
really
understand
how
the
legislative
process
works
here.
B
Maybe
they
were
interns
for
a
senate
office
15
years
ago,
but
it's
been
a
long
time
and
they
probably
don't
understand
all
those
complex
interrelationships
and
all
those
complex
interests
and
how
the
body
actually
works
so
make
sure
that
you
spend
some
time
with
those
attorneys
and
really
explain
to
them
what
the
interests
are
and
what
you're
concerned
about
and
how
it
actually
works
and
what
you,
what
you
what's
free
to
disclose
and
what
you,
what
should
be,
what
you
want
to
try
and
maintain
another
thing
to
think
about
too,
and
I'm
talking
now
to
the
legislative,
attorneys
and
legislative
staffers
here.
B
Does
your
client,
the
legislator,
understand
what
you
do?
I
really
recommend,
even
if
you're
pretty
sure
they
do
have
that
conversation
right?
Definitely,
I'm
just
good.
For
example,
I
definitely
don't
have
a
legislator
testify
in
a
deposition
where
they
ask
them.
Hey
do
you
know
so,
and
so
this
legislative
attorney
working
for
a
central
legislative
agency.
Do
you
know
who
they
are?
Oh
no.
I
have
no
idea
who
they
are
well.
Do
you
did
they
provide
you,
legal,
no,
no
they're,
they're,
just
somebody!
B
I
have
to
work
with
so
that
I
you
know,
because
the
the
house
won't
give
me
enough
budget
to
be
able
to
pay
for
my
own
staff.
Please
please,
please
don't
allow
that
to
happen.
B
Similarly,
once
you
set
up
once
everybody
understands,
what's
going
on,
do
you
actually
have
the
right
structure?
Do
you
have
a
secure
computer
system
again,
let's
avoid
that
waiver
issue.
B
Don't
share
information,
don't
put
stuff
out
onto
a
server
that
is
public,
because
that
very
well
could
result
in
waiver
lawyers
providing
are
one
of
the
things
that
often
is
a
real
issue
here
is
that
you
have
you'll
almost
always
have
a
lawyer
who's
drafting
the
bill,
who's
actually
putting
the
lines
on
the
page
right,
because
the
voting
rights
very
complex
redistricting
is
very
complex.
B
The
and
then
you'll
also
have
other
attorneys.
That
will
be
providing
legal
advice
about
what
is
appropriate
under
the
voting
rights
act,
and
you
know
the
other
constitutional
requirements
and
maybe
stat
state
statutory
requirements.
B
You
know
providing
that
legal
advice
well
make
sure
that
the
lawyer
is
providing
legal
advice,
not
policy
advice,
because
if
they're
providing
policy
advice,
then
that's
not
going
to
be
privileged
right.
Another
issue
that
you
can
have
are
job
titles.
B
If
you
are
an
attorney
and
you're
going
to
be
providing
legal
advice,
I
very
much
suggest
that
you
have
attorney
or
lawyer
or
counsel
in
your
job
title.
Another
issue
is
dual
job
titles,
general
counsel
and
chief
of
staff.
There
are
lots
of
them
in
texas.
I
know
do
your
best
to
document
when
you
are
praying
providing
legal
advice
to
your
client,
because
the
I
it
will
be
very
difficult
for
you
for
you
to
be
able
to
separate
the
policy
advice
that
you're
providing
to
your
client.
B
From
that
legal
advice,
and
one
last
thing
here,
one
of
the
very
common
things
that
that
happens
is
you
know
some
member
will
slap
you
on
the
back
and
say
man
that
is
fantastic.
You
did
a
great
job
and
you
said
oh
well,
you
know
anybody
probably
could
have
thought
that
up.
But
you
know
I
I
did
my
best.
No,
no
do
not
self-deprecate,
you
are
an
attorney.
B
B
Make
sure
the
relationships
that
you
have,
especially
if
you're
not
talking
about
direct
staff
about
personal
staff
to
a
legislator,
make
sure
those
relationships
are
clear.
For
example,
here's
a
screen
wrap
from
the
statute
for
my
agency,
the
agency
I
work
for
and
that
specifically
permits
us
to
provide
legal
advice
and
also
drafting
assistance
right.
So
we
clearly
are
able
to
do
those
things.
B
What's
more
in
the
last
decade,
we
were
criticized
or
questioned
really
by
by
the
court
and
also
by
the
by
the
the
other,
the
the
various
different
parties
in
the
litigation
saying.
Well,
you
know
you
have
you.
B
The
texas
legislature
have
existed
for
150
years,
but
you
haven't
even
you've,
never
passed
a
statute
that
actually
expresses
what
legislative
privilege
is,
and
they
kind
of
had
a
good
point
so
subsequently
that
that
statute
has
been
passed
and
what's
more,
we
have
also
passed
an
additional
statute
that
specifically
describes
the
attorney-client
relationship
and
attorney-client
privilege
in
the
legislative
environment.
B
B
One
of
the
things
about
the
attorney-client
privilege
is
that
it
one
of
the
main
factors
about
whether
or
not
it
exists
is
whether
or
not
the
client
believes
that
it
exists
right
same
thing
somewhat
for
the
legislative
privilege
as
well,
so
again,
going
back
to
that
whole
issue
about
whether
or
not
a
client
might
get
confused
about
your
role,
if
you
have
them
sign
for
lack
of
a
better
terms,
a
retention
agreement
with
your
agency
or
your
organization
that
works
for
the
legislature.
B
That
can
really
clarify
what
you
do
and
what
your
expectations
are.
Another
aspect
of
this,
the
attorney-client
privilege
the
default
is
that
the
privilege
is
asserted
for
legislative
privilege.
There
is
no
default.
The
legislature
needs
to
affirmatively
assert
the
privilege,
which
can
be
kind
of
a
pain,
because
you
know
you're
you,
you
know
they
don't
want
to
turn
over
this
information
as
somebody
who's
representing
them,
but
you
didn't
actually
get
that
specific
instruction.
B
Also
I'd
really
recommend
that
you
that
you
put
together
some
good
habits
about
how
you
interact.
Legislative
meetings
tend
to
look
like
this,
and
it's
because
they're
efficient
and
you
know,
gets
everybody
on
the
same
page.
Everybody
hears
the
same
thing,
but
but
and
also
you
know,
it
also
kind
of
sells
egos
a
little
bit
because
you
don't
have
to
have
a
discussion
about
who's,
not
important
enough
to
be
in
the
meeting.
B
The
problem
is
that
also
large
meetings
like
this
tend
to
have
a
very
broad
agenda
that
wanders
all
over
the
place,
and
so
you
you
have.
It
makes
it
very
difficult
to
say
that.
Well,
we
only
talked
about
attorney-client
issues,
or
we
only
talked
about
state
policy
and
no
politics
right.
B
Have
your
meetings
be
small,
have
a
specific
agenda
that
you're
going
to
talk
about,
especially
if
you're
talking
about
redistricting
and
then
you
know
only
talk
only
talk
to
the
people
that
you
need
to
be
talking
to
about
these
particular
issues
and
then
document
to
the
best
of
your
ability
document.
B
The
fact
that
you
provided
legal
advice
in
this
meeting
about
these
things,
because
that
may
be
may
become
useful
in
the
future,
and
this
also
goes
for
email
conversations
and,
oh,
my
goodness,
like
text
chats
on
your
phone,
do
not
be
afraid
if
you
are
talking
about
something
to
if
you're
talking
about
a
voting
rights,
act
issue
or
some
any
other
legal
issue
or
policy
issue,
and
you
notice
that
somebody
is
on
that
chat
or
on
that
email
string.
B
That
doesn't
need
to
be
there
or
is
it's
inappropriate
for
them
to
be
there
for
one
reason
or
another
cut
off
that
chain
redo
it
with
the
people
that
are
appropriate
and
restart
it,
and
have
that
conversation?
B
Don't
just
continue
to
have
conversations
among
things
before
and
then
one
additional
issue
that
I
really
want
you
to
consider
is
legal
holes.
Okay,
this
is
something
that
we
haven't
really
talked
about
at
all,
but
the
the
issue
here
is
that
when
litigation
is
taking
place
or
is
likely
to
take
place,
you
have
to
start
saving
all
the
information
that
is
relevant
to
that
litigation.
You
cannot
destroy
it
anymore,
have
a
plan
for
figuring
out,
who
is
maintaining
that
information
figuring
out
how
it's
maintained,
figuring
out,
how
you're
going
to
collect
it?
B
If
you
think
that
you
need
to
collect
it
or
instruct
them
to
preserve
it,
if
they're
going
to
preserve
it,
have
a
plan
for
that
type
of
thing
and
then
have
a
plan
for
conserving
that
information
for
the
tendency
of
the
litigation.
B
The
issue
here
is
that
you
don't
the
the
problem
here.
Is
that
very
likely
there
is
going
to
be
some
certain,
whether
it's
waiver
or
the
there's
judicial
piercing
of
privilege,
there's
going
to
be
some
documents
that
have
to
be
turned
over
in
a
voting
rights
act
case,
and
if
you
only
turn
over
the
documents
that
make
you
look
good.
B
That
damages
your
credibility
with
the
judge
judges.
It
damages
your
credibility
with
the
with
the
other
claimants
right
and,
what's
more,
what
ends
up
happening
is
they
is
the
you
turn
over
six
emails
and
they
all
look
fine.
Well,
then,
the
plaintiff
says
that's
not
credible
judge
is
we
need
to
see
more?
We
don't.
B
So
I'm
going
to
close
here
with
some
additional
resources.
Peter
watson,
who
we
heard
from
earlier
this
week,
has
a
fantastic
document
on
legislative
immunity,
which
is
a
slightly
different
concept,
but
has
some
great
cases.
This
publication
primarily
focuses
on
state
constitutional,
legislative
immunity,
where
st,
like
the
state,
governor
or
the
state
police
power,
is
trying
to
access
the
legislature
or
prosecute
the
legislature.
For
what
they're
doing
it's
a
fantastic
publication,
I
highly
recommend
it.
B
Another
document
that
was
put
together
and
chrissy
kind
of
pointed
and
touched
on
this
at
the
beginning
here
is
for
legislators
and
legislative
staff.
Ncsl
will
provide
you
a
copy
of
the
state
legislatures
and
litigation
a
toolkit.
This
was
put
together
under
my
administration
of
staff,
chair
of
ncsl.
B
I
used
this
document
to
to
do
put
together
this
presentation.
I
think
it's
really
excellent.
It
has
a
lot
of
forms
that
can
help
you
do
exactly
the
types
of
things
that
I
was
talking
about
before.
So
that
is
all
I
have
now.
I'm
gonna
go
turn
to
the
questions.
B
So
the
first
one
here
so
are
there
concerns
about
legislative
privilege
when
a
state
creates
a
redistricting
website
where
maps
are
uploaded,
is
there
some
hidden
dynamite
there
or
best
practices?
Well,.
B
Yeah,
there
are
substantial
issues
there
if
you
have
waived
your
or
if
you
have
posted
maps
that
you're
considering
passing
publicly
those
maps
are
now
going
to
be
public
information
right
that
that
the
privilege,
with
regard
to
that
map,
has
been
disclosed
now
when
you're
talking
about
the
effort
that
went
together
for
for
actually
putting
that
map
together.
Well,
that's
that's
not
a
problem
that
that
privilege
doesn't
get
disclosed
unless
you
post
the
metadata
behind
the
map
right.
That's
that
could
be
a
problem.
B
B
It
should
it
should.
I
can
also
tell
you
that
it's
not
entirely
clear
that
it
does
because
of
the
delegation
issue
to
the
to
this
body,
and,
and
so
all
of
those
issues
have
to
be
refought,
because
you're
not
you're,
not
doing
you're
not
participating
in
the
commission.
As.
B
You're
participating
in
commission
doing
a
legislative
act
as
part
of
the
commission,
so
it
should
it
should,
but
you
know
the
it
it
can
be
problematic.
I
can't
tell
you
that
it's
100
is
the
concept.
Basically,
just
access
like
public
has
access.
Then
it's
not
privileged.
No,
I
don't
think
so
aaron
and
if
we,
if
you
have
you
want
some
follow-up
on
that,
we
can
talk
about
that.
Some
more
the
attorney-client
privilege
belongs
to
the
client.
Doesn't
yes,
thank
you
megan!
Thank
you
for
that
reminder.
Yes,
absolutely.
B
The
attorney-client
relationship
belongs
to
the
client.
Of
course.
The
issue
for
attorney-client
privilege
when
you're
talking
about
that
is
that
the
the
who
is
the
client
in
the
legislative
environment,
which
can
be
a
very,
very
difficult
question
to
answer,
but
but
yes,
you're
exactly
right
are
there
concerns
about
legislative
privilege
when
the
state
creates
a
okay,
I'm
sorry
and
then
could
privilege
be
removed
for
an
entire
chamber
by
an
act
of
the
legislature
for
a
specific
purpose.
B
For
example,
if
a
body
wanted
to
pursue
redistricting
in
a
more
transparent
manner,
so
my
argument
would
be
absent
a
constitutional
amendment.
No,
the
legislature
cannot,
the
legislature
is
bound
by
its
constitution
and,
if
there's
a
speech
or
debate
clause
in
its
constitution,
you
know
this
is
the
whole
question
of
like.
Can
the
legislature
make
a
rock
so
big
that
it
can't
lift
it?
You
know
that
that
that
kind
of
thing
right
and
my
argument
would
be
no.
B
If
it's
an
unconstitutional
statute,
then
it
that
it
can't
work
at
the
same
time.
There's
an
argument,
though,
that
the
legislature,
the
legislature,
has
waived
this
privilege
and
that
argument
can
also
have
a
lot
of
weight
and
so
it'll
be
kind
of
it'll.
Be
definitely
one
of
those
issues
where
you
know
depends
on
the
judge
that
you're
dealing
with
and
depends
on
the
issues
and
the
facts
that
are
going
to
be
involved.
Are
there
concerns
about
legislative
privilege
when
a
state
creates
a
redistrict
okay?
B
We
talked
about
that
one,
I'm
sorry.
I
keep
coming
to
that.
This
seems
like
instructions
on
making
resisting
as
opaque
as
possible,
given
a
long
history
of
gerrymandering
against
public
interest
behind
closed
doors.
Why
not
advise
how
to
increase
transparency
and
the
reason
there
is
that
again
the
question
I
compare
this
to
the
jazz
band
right?
Nobody
gets
up
on
a
stage
and
plays
a
song
perfectly
the
first
time
nobody
has.
Nobody
is
able
to
get
out
there
and
make
all
the
right
decisions.
B
You
have
to
have
a
conversation
with
people
so
that
they
can
provide
the
advice
to
be
able
to
comply
with
the
law
or
yes
depart
from
the
law
absolutely,
but
the
most
likely
scenario
here.
The
the
issues
that
I
have
always
dealt
with
with
my
with
my
legislative
clients
is
hey.
I
want
to
do
this
thing
and
the
issue
almost
all,
and
then
I
have
to
provide
them
with
the
advice
saying
look.
B
I
understand
that
you
want
to
do
this
thing,
but
it's
unconstitutional
or
it
violates
this
law
or
you
know
it
violates
the
this
federal
law,
and
so
they
say:
okay.
Well,
how
about?
I
do
this
thing?
Well,
great
awesome!
We
can
do
we
can
do
this
thing.
We
can
do
this
in
a
different
way
and
we
can
get
your
policy
goal
accomplished
and
then
we
can
also
stay
within
the
law.
If
you
don't
allow
the
legislature
to
be
able
to
do
those
things.
B
Basically,
what
you
end
up
doing
is
just
having
just
an
unending
list
of
discriminatory
statements
that
are
provided
by
that
are
made
by
legislators
or
made
by
legislative
staff
that
don't
understand
the
issues
or
are
trying
to
understand
them
better
and
those
discriminatory
statements
are
then
imputed
to
the
legislature
as
some
sort
of
intent
to
to
to
act
in
some
sort
of
illegal
way.
A
B
If
anybody
would
like
to
talk
about
this
further,
I
would
be
happy
to
do
it.
My
phone
number
is
on
there.
You
can
also
grab
if
you
click
on
that
qr
code
that
will
enter
my
contact
information
into
your
phone.
I
would
love
to
speak
with
you
more
and
maybe
give
you
some
some
more
stories
or
whatever
so
christy
up
to
you.
A
All
right
well,
thank
you.
John
john
mentioned
some
really
great
resources
earlier,
and
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
our
ncso's
redistricting.
A
Chapter
seven
is
completely
devoted
to
legislative
privilege.
So
if
you
like
a
copy,
go
ahead
and
email
me,
but
I
just
want
to
thank
john
for
taking
the
time
today.
I
know
sessions
are
ramping
up
in
texas.
So
thank
you
very
much.
A
This
is
a
very
important
topic,
so
it's
great
to
to
hear
about
legislative
privilege,
so
I'm
gonna
since
there's
no
more
questions
if
we're
just
gonna
go
ahead
and
end
the
session,
but
please
join
us
for
ask
the
experts
that
is
coming
up
next
and
the
session
wrap
up.
So
thank
you.