Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Saturday Morning News

Intervie with Nelda Blair

Aired August 23, 2003 - 08:12   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Time to open our Legal Briefs on some other court cases today. On our docket this morning, we'll be talking about that legal fight that I'm sure you've heard about over a Ten Commandments monument in Alabama. In the latest twist now, Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is now suspended from his job for refusing to remove the monument he put in the rotunda of the Alabama Judiciary Building.
To talk about this case and some others, former prosecutor Nelda Blair join us from Houston this morning.

Good morning to you, Nelda.

NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Good morning.

COLLINS: And civil rights attorney Avery Friedman is in Cleveland, Ohio.

And good morning to you, Avery.

AVERY FRIEDMAN, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Good morning, Heidi.

COLLINS: Thanks to both of you for being here.

FRIEDMAN: Thank you.

COLLINS: Let's go ahead and start with the Ten Commandments case. Is this not an issue of the separation of church and state, Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, it is an issue of that particular separation and you've got to admire the justice for his firm beliefs. I mean he's doing what he thinks is right. On the other hand, he is a judge. He's bound to follow the laws, not only of his state, but of this United States. And he's not doing that. Unfortunately, what's happened to him is standing up for his beliefs has put him in a position of completely violating what he's really pledged to do, which is follow the law. And unfortunately it's come back to bite him.

COLLINS: Avery, what are your thoughts on this?

FRIEDMAN: You know what? I don't see anything to admire this fellow about. Back in November of 2000, he actually ran on a ticket of essentially creating religion as the basis for judicial action instead of the constitution. He has intentionally, openly defiantly violated the law and now Bill Pryor, the attorney general of Alabama, is going to be involved in the prosecution of a judicial inquiry. This fellow is in trouble. The good news, however, is that the eight other justices have said, you know what, we're going to take care of this, get it resolved. I think the case gives a whole new meaning to the phrase hang 10.

COLLINS: Well, let me just ask the both of you, then, also, is there anything that can be done now that this petition has actually been turned down?

Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, the Supreme Court is the ultimate authority. The only other thing the judge could do is try to get to the Supreme Court by another means and ask them again to hear it. But they're not going to do that. And once the Supreme Court turns it down, it's done. It leaves the current law upstanding. And he has to follow it or give up his judgeship. He's got to do it.

He's no, he's above the law no differently than any other man or woman in this United States. He's got to do it.

COLLINS: Avery, what about Moore's career?

FRIEDMAN: Well, you know what? In Alabama you run for this position. This is a political position. So even though he's a -- you know what? Frankly, there is anarchy in Montgomery and he has somehow been able to persuade the citizens there that he will probably run again and be elected. The only thing dumber than what he has done is he brought in Alan Keyes, who said that maybe George Bush should pardon him.

Well, here's a bulletin. This isn't a criminal case, it is a civil case. And you know what? There's nothing to pardon. This judge violated the law, but he'll probably be reelected in Alabama.

COLLINS: Well, we will have to see about that. That is certainly true.

Let's move on now to our next case, or at least our next issue to talk about this morning. We want to let everybody know the latest information on this. A federal judge on Friday denied Fox News Channel's request for an injunction to block humorist AL Franken's new book, whose title mocks the Fox slogan that we have heard many times before, "fair and balanced."

What about a trademark here? Fox did trademark this slogan, "fair and balanced," in 1998. Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, you know, we have some really well settled, fairly strong trademark and copyright laws in this country. They protect people and they protect the entities that have slogans and logos that are theirs solely.

But this is Al Franken. This is not a situation where we have a serious other news channel that's trying to steal Fox's aura. This is Al Franken. I mean it's... COLLINS: Is that the distinction then, because he is a political satirist?

BLAIR: It's not just that.

FRIEDMAN: No.

BLAIR: There are some other problems wrong with this case, including the fact that it's not the sole title of the book, Fox waited a long time to file the case, unfortunately. The book was published by the time Fox starting kicking about it. So, obviously the court said look, these are words that you haven't, you haven't shown to be yours only, especially inside the title of a book, and especially with a satirist.

FRIEDMAN: No.

COLLINS: Avery, does Fox have any ground for this lawsuit?

FRIEDMAN: No, that's not -- that isn't what happened here, Heidi. Look it, this is a sucker suit. Let me explain something. This has nothing to do with trademark. It has to do with the first amendment. And the fact is the federal judge yesterday said this, "I've had hard cases, I've had easy cases, this is an easy case. There's no basis in fact or law." So you know what Fox has done? There is nothing honest about this case. There's nothing fair about the case. There's nothing balanced. And the best evidence of that is we're covering this case as if there's some merit to it. It was phony from the moment the case was filed. And you know what? Fox, as a result of bringing the suit, took Al Franken's book, which was like 489 on Amazon.com, rocketed past Harry Potter. It's number one on Amazon.com.

BLAIR: I've got to tell you, there's no way that Fox would have brought this in a mean-spirited manner in order to promote Franken's book, which is exactly what happened. I think...

FRIEDMAN: It's exactly right.

BLAIR: I know they brought it under a true copyright claim. The problem is it didn't go there.

But you're right, the one thing it did do -- and I'm sure Franken is laughing his way to the bank -- is shoot him to the top.

COLLINS: Yes, he has actually thanked Fox News.

FRIEDMAN: The case was as phony as a $3 bill. It was just a phony case. They knew it and they got the publicity for it. It wasn't fair, it wasn't balanced and it wasn't honest.

COLLINS: All right, to the both of you this morning, thanks so much for being here, for your insight in both of these issues.

Former prosecutor Nelda Blair, coming to us from Houston this morning. BLAIR: Thank you.

COLLINS: And civil rights attorney Avery Friedman in Cleveland, Ohio.

FRIEDMAN: Nice to be with you.

COLLINS: Thanks, guys.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired August 23, 2003 - 08:12   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Time to open our Legal Briefs on some other court cases today. On our docket this morning, we'll be talking about that legal fight that I'm sure you've heard about over a Ten Commandments monument in Alabama. In the latest twist now, Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is now suspended from his job for refusing to remove the monument he put in the rotunda of the Alabama Judiciary Building.
To talk about this case and some others, former prosecutor Nelda Blair join us from Houston this morning.

Good morning to you, Nelda.

NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Good morning.

COLLINS: And civil rights attorney Avery Friedman is in Cleveland, Ohio.

And good morning to you, Avery.

AVERY FRIEDMAN, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Good morning, Heidi.

COLLINS: Thanks to both of you for being here.

FRIEDMAN: Thank you.

COLLINS: Let's go ahead and start with the Ten Commandments case. Is this not an issue of the separation of church and state, Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, it is an issue of that particular separation and you've got to admire the justice for his firm beliefs. I mean he's doing what he thinks is right. On the other hand, he is a judge. He's bound to follow the laws, not only of his state, but of this United States. And he's not doing that. Unfortunately, what's happened to him is standing up for his beliefs has put him in a position of completely violating what he's really pledged to do, which is follow the law. And unfortunately it's come back to bite him.

COLLINS: Avery, what are your thoughts on this?

FRIEDMAN: You know what? I don't see anything to admire this fellow about. Back in November of 2000, he actually ran on a ticket of essentially creating religion as the basis for judicial action instead of the constitution. He has intentionally, openly defiantly violated the law and now Bill Pryor, the attorney general of Alabama, is going to be involved in the prosecution of a judicial inquiry. This fellow is in trouble. The good news, however, is that the eight other justices have said, you know what, we're going to take care of this, get it resolved. I think the case gives a whole new meaning to the phrase hang 10.

COLLINS: Well, let me just ask the both of you, then, also, is there anything that can be done now that this petition has actually been turned down?

Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, the Supreme Court is the ultimate authority. The only other thing the judge could do is try to get to the Supreme Court by another means and ask them again to hear it. But they're not going to do that. And once the Supreme Court turns it down, it's done. It leaves the current law upstanding. And he has to follow it or give up his judgeship. He's got to do it.

He's no, he's above the law no differently than any other man or woman in this United States. He's got to do it.

COLLINS: Avery, what about Moore's career?

FRIEDMAN: Well, you know what? In Alabama you run for this position. This is a political position. So even though he's a -- you know what? Frankly, there is anarchy in Montgomery and he has somehow been able to persuade the citizens there that he will probably run again and be elected. The only thing dumber than what he has done is he brought in Alan Keyes, who said that maybe George Bush should pardon him.

Well, here's a bulletin. This isn't a criminal case, it is a civil case. And you know what? There's nothing to pardon. This judge violated the law, but he'll probably be reelected in Alabama.

COLLINS: Well, we will have to see about that. That is certainly true.

Let's move on now to our next case, or at least our next issue to talk about this morning. We want to let everybody know the latest information on this. A federal judge on Friday denied Fox News Channel's request for an injunction to block humorist AL Franken's new book, whose title mocks the Fox slogan that we have heard many times before, "fair and balanced."

What about a trademark here? Fox did trademark this slogan, "fair and balanced," in 1998. Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, you know, we have some really well settled, fairly strong trademark and copyright laws in this country. They protect people and they protect the entities that have slogans and logos that are theirs solely.

But this is Al Franken. This is not a situation where we have a serious other news channel that's trying to steal Fox's aura. This is Al Franken. I mean it's... COLLINS: Is that the distinction then, because he is a political satirist?

BLAIR: It's not just that.

FRIEDMAN: No.

BLAIR: There are some other problems wrong with this case, including the fact that it's not the sole title of the book, Fox waited a long time to file the case, unfortunately. The book was published by the time Fox starting kicking about it. So, obviously the court said look, these are words that you haven't, you haven't shown to be yours only, especially inside the title of a book, and especially with a satirist.

FRIEDMAN: No.

COLLINS: Avery, does Fox have any ground for this lawsuit?

FRIEDMAN: No, that's not -- that isn't what happened here, Heidi. Look it, this is a sucker suit. Let me explain something. This has nothing to do with trademark. It has to do with the first amendment. And the fact is the federal judge yesterday said this, "I've had hard cases, I've had easy cases, this is an easy case. There's no basis in fact or law." So you know what Fox has done? There is nothing honest about this case. There's nothing fair about the case. There's nothing balanced. And the best evidence of that is we're covering this case as if there's some merit to it. It was phony from the moment the case was filed. And you know what? Fox, as a result of bringing the suit, took Al Franken's book, which was like 489 on Amazon.com, rocketed past Harry Potter. It's number one on Amazon.com.

BLAIR: I've got to tell you, there's no way that Fox would have brought this in a mean-spirited manner in order to promote Franken's book, which is exactly what happened. I think...

FRIEDMAN: It's exactly right.

BLAIR: I know they brought it under a true copyright claim. The problem is it didn't go there.

But you're right, the one thing it did do -- and I'm sure Franken is laughing his way to the bank -- is shoot him to the top.

COLLINS: Yes, he has actually thanked Fox News.

FRIEDMAN: The case was as phony as a $3 bill. It was just a phony case. They knew it and they got the publicity for it. It wasn't fair, it wasn't balanced and it wasn't honest.

COLLINS: All right, to the both of you this morning, thanks so much for being here, for your insight in both of these issues.

Former prosecutor Nelda Blair, coming to us from Houston this morning. BLAIR: Thank you.

COLLINS: And civil rights attorney Avery Friedman in Cleveland, Ohio.

FRIEDMAN: Nice to be with you.

COLLINS: Thanks, guys.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com