Brigid Bergin: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Brigid Bergin, senior reporter in the WNYC and Gothamist newsroom, filling in for Brian today. On today's show, in the wake of George Floyd's death, police departments around the country promised transparency and accountability in the form of body camera installation. Later in the show, we'll talk to ProPublica's Eric Umansky about a six-month investigation into the way police departments do and do not use body cameras.

Then we'll take a closer look at the new online shopping competitors to Amazon. Where did they come from, and why are their prices so low? We'll close the show with the executive director of New York Cares and we'll ask you, how are you giving back during the holidays? First, a major decision out of New York State's highest court is sending reverberations around the country as races for control of the House of Representatives heat up next year.

In a four-to-three ruling, the court tossed out congressional maps drawn for the 2022 election and ruled that the state's independent redistricting commission must go back to work and draw new congressional district lines ahead of next year's pivotal House elections. This bipartisan commission, which has not had much luck in the past, now has to literally go back to the drawing board with a February deadline. If they can't create maps that they agree on, well, then the process kicks back over to the state legislature, which is controlled by the Democrats.

If it feels like we've been having a version of this conversation for a while now, that's because we have, but the stakes are as high as ever once again. To help us unpack how we got here, what it means in the short term, and how this could change the balance of power in Congress, and [unintelligible 00:01:59] my dad, your summer voting plans, is my colleague Jon Campbell, Albany reporter for Gothamist and WNYC. Jon, welcome to the show.

Jon Campbell: Hi, Brigid. Pleasure to be with you.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, I described the decision in sort of broad strokes, but can you give us some background on this case? When was it filed and who was it filed by?

Jon Campbell: This case was filed last year by Democrats, essentially. It has the name of a voter. Essentially, this is a case from congressional Democrats, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. What they argued was that the lines that were put into place last year by a so-called special master, a court-appointed mapmaker, they argued that those were only supposed to be temporary. Those were only supposed to be in place for last year's elections when Republicans did very, very well in New York and that the independent redistricting commission should get another crack at it.

Now that's notable for a few different reasons. One being that the commission totally deadlocked last year, and that's part of how we got into this whole mess. Now that panel which is essentially five Democrats five Republicans, they're going to get another crack at drawing these lines and then it goes to the state legislature.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, I will just note for our listeners we're having a little bit of an issue with your line. Folks, if it sounded a little garbled, we're working on that on our end. Listeners, we want to have you participate in this conversation. Do you have a question about redistricting? Did your congressional district change last year? Maybe you're one of the voters in, say, the new 10th congressional district or maybe a voter in that 3rd congressional district where there's a special election because of the ousted Representative George Santos.

What are you hoping to see in these new congressional lines? Are you getting confused by this process and when you think you'll end up voting next year to begin with? We have a primary scheduled for June. Could there be another primary in August? Remember that back in 2022? Give us a call. Let us know what you are thinking about this new ruling, the new district lines, what you hope to see in your new district. The number is 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. You can also text at that number or tweet @BrianLehrer.

Jon, you were describing this case, it was filed this year. You said it was filed by a voter. Just recap for us who it was actually filed by and then let's talk a little bit about what brought us to this point.

Jon Campbell: Yes, absolutely, and sorry about that with the line there. Essentially, this is a case from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and what they argued was that the independent redistricting commission should have another crack at drawing the lines. Last year, the congressional lines were drawn by a special master after Republicans sued and argued that Democrats had gerrymandered the lines. Republicans did very well under those lines.

Democrats sued this time last year, and they won. They won. That's the case that they won this week, and that's where we are now, where the independent redistricting commission, five Democrats, five Republicans, they're going to get another crack at drawing this, and then it goes to state legislature.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, this is where we are now, and we're going to get into a little of the history of how we ended up here, possible scenarios for next year. For people who might be hearing this news for the first time this morning, why is this such a big deal and why is this decision out of New York getting so much national attention?

Jon Campbell: Well, it's a big deal because this is going to give Democrats an opportunity to get more favorable lines. That is a really big deal when you're talking about balance of Congress when really only a handful of seats in the entire country are going to make up who controls the House of Representatives. It is a really big deal that Democrats could be in a position to get more favorable lines here because the Democratic legislature in Albany is controlled by Democrats. It is majority Democrats. You're in a situation where the Democrats could benefit.

It could counteract, say, North Carolina, where there's a more beneficial Republican map in place this time. Every seat matters here. Every seat on Long Island is going to make a difference here. A couple of seats in the Hudson Valley, and if the boundaries move just a little bit, that could be more beneficial to Democrats.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, let's take a step back and talk about how we ended up here. We've mentioned the independent redistricting commission in passing, but what is it? How was it established?

Jon Campbell: The independent redistricting commission was established way back in 2014 by the voters of the state of New York. It was a constitutional amendment before state lawmakers basically got carte blanche to draw lines however they saw fit. There was a lot of talk about gerrymandering back then. There was a new process put into place in 2014 by the voters that created the independent redistricting commission.

Basically, that is 10 members, 8 of which are appointed by legislative leaders, 4 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and then those members appoint 2 other members to the board and then they have to come up with maps that are submitted to the legislature for approval. The idea is to take it out of the lawmakers' hands, but lawmakers, if they reject those maps twice, they get to draw the lines. That's really where we are now. The commission is going to get their second chance to draw the lines.

If the Democratic lawmakers reject it, then they step in and they draw it, and it's up to them and Governor Hochul to sign off. This was the first time this redistricting cycle-- this census cycle was the first time that that commission was put into place, was utilized, and it failed spectacularly the first time around. Now, the second time around, we'll see what happens.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, from the perspective of certainly observers, it seems like one of the criticisms of the commission is that maybe it was designed to fail, that this bipartisan setup kind of sets up a likelihood that they will deadlock. What do you make of that criticism?

Jon Campbell: Well, anytime you have five members of one party and five members of the other, that possibility exists. Yes, there are people who do believe that it's designed to fail, that do believe it needs to be changed, tweaked, corrected, but that hasn't happened yet. We have this position in place, and it is possible, if not likely, that they deadlock again, and then it goes to the Democratic legislature to draw.

That is a valid criticism, I think, and it is one that we could see play out again here. The commission has until February 28th to come up with a new map. It's a tight time frame because the congressional primaries are just in June.

Brigid Bergin: Let's go to Craig in Riverdale. Craig, thanks for calling WNYC.

Craig: Good question. Isn't this a fancy phrase for gerrymandering? If I remember correctly, a lot of years ago or a few years ago, that was a dirty word and is illegal. My other question is, for a democratic society like we are, how come there's so many procedures that seem to feel the state where it is less in control of the voters? This gerrymandering, what you're doing here, makes everything weighted or with thumbs on the scales.

Brigid Bergin: Craig, thank you. Wait one second because the top of your question got cut off, so I want you to repeat it. Can you just-- Your concern was that-- Go ahead.

Craig: Gerrymandering is illegal, I thought. Why are we doing this, and why is this procedure that we have seems to put voters in the democratic process in so few hands of people have control over how we vote, how elections turn out? You guys are diluting the validity of how we vote.

Brigid Bergin: Craig, thanks so much for your question. Jon, a concern raised by Craig is that this process will be or sounds like gerrymandering and certainly it's a good setup for explaining the ruling in last year's case. Maybe to answer Craig's question, we could start there.

Jon Campbell: Craig is right that partisan gerrymandering in New York State at least is against the state Constitution, and that is because of that 2014 vote that voters approved the independent redistricting commission, this new redistricting process. It also included a provision in there that basically said you cannot draw lines to benefit any one particular party or person, and that means maybe you want to put all Democrats in one district, and so it makes it a stronger Democratic district. That could be seen as drawing the lines in a partisan fashion.

Maybe you want to put all Republicans in one district so that there aren't any in the neighboring districts, and that's a method called packing. That's one that in theory would be partisan gerrymandering. Now, that is what Republicans sued under in part to get new maps last year. The Court of Appeals ruled that Democrats did do that, that they drew the lines in a partisan manner, and that is much of the reason why the lines were thrown out last year, along with numerous process issues that were also deemed to be unconstitutional.

That brings up the point too that this battle isn't over yet. If Democrats do draw the lines and they do do it in a fashion that is beneficial to them, Republicans are certainly going to sue and argue that that is violating the Constitution's anti-gerrymandering provision, and we're going to be right back in court within a matter of months.

Brigid Bergin: Just so we're clear for people who are trying to maintain their redistricting scorecards and the court cases that have been involved here, let's just make the distinction between last year's court case and what the fight was about there, and then this most recent case that you've just described, the ruling that came down this week because there was a difference in-- While fundamentally it involves redrawing the lines as a result, the fight and the objections were different at the get-go. Correct?

Jon Campbell: Yes, absolutely. Last year, Democrats in the state legislature stepped in, drew the lines, the congressional lines. They were heavily tilted towards Democrats, and Republicans sued. They argued that it was a violation of the process that they stepped in too soon, that the redistricting commission should have sent another set of maps, but [unintelligible 00:13:21] and they also argued that it violated the partisan gerrymandering provision.

Republicans sued, they won, they got new maps, they liked those maps, which were drawn by a court-appointed expert, and Democrats hated them. Democrats sued, argued that no, that should have been a temporary map, that the redistricting commission should get another crack at it, even if their deadlines had already passed. That is what the Court of Appeals agreed with this week. That's how we are in this position where we're getting yet another congressional map.

Brigid Bergin: [chuckles] In filling in some of what you just explained there, those maps last year drawn by special master Jonathan Cervas, and a professor from I believe Pittsburgh, and those maps were what helped Republicans pick up those six seats enough to help Republicans take majority control of the House of Representatives. Jon, now, how likely are those Republican districts from Central New York to Long Island likely to be impacted in this new redistricting process? Will they be the focus?

Jon Campbell: Almost certainly. There will certainly be some level of focus on those marginal districts where even shifting the boundary, just a town or two over in, say, [unintelligible 00:14:43] County or say Nassau County, Suffolk County, can have a huge impact on how those votes will turn and the balance of power in those districts. That'll be certainly the ones that everybody is looking at because it doesn't really make that much of a difference if, say, [unintelligible 00:15:05] district changes a little bit.

That's going to be solidly blue, but these marginal purple districts, those are the ones where everybody's going to be paying attention and can have a huge impact on who takes control of Congress in 2024.

Brigid Bergin: You mentioned the deadline of February. What needs to happen by February and what will that mean for, as we mentioned, these primary contests, which are scheduled for June, right?

Jon Campbell: Yes. What's going to happen in February is the commission will come up with the final lines. They'll send it to the state legislature. The state legislature will have to vote down on it. They have to say, "Yes, we agree with this," or, "No, we don't." If they say no, that's when the legislature steps in, draws them themselves, then they vote on it again and send it to the governor.

From there, that's where you could see the lawsuits. [chuckles] I hate to say this, but in theory, the primary is in June, but in practice, if Republicans sue and it works its way through the court and it drags on, they could push that back to July, to August. That's what happened last year. We had a congressional primary in August, a great time to vote in the summer when everybody's away. That could in theory happen next year if these court cases draw out once again.

Brigid Bergin: Now, one thing we should note, especially for those of you listening in that 3rd congressional district, Eastern Queens and Nassau County you have a special election to fill the seat held by former Congress member George Santos on February 13th. Jon, let's make it really clear, this special election will be based on the current district lines, right?

Jon Campbell: Yes, absolutely. That district, that's part of Nassau County, the northwestern part of Nassau County, and a little piece of Queens too. That is going to stay the same for this special election, and that's because it's filling out the remainder of this term. Whoever wins that will serve through the end of 2024, they'd have to run for re-election in the new seat, whatever that ends up looking for if they want re-election, but in the short term, that special election is to fill out the remainder of this term, so it's on the current map. Not to confuse everybody further here.

Brigid Bergin: No. It's not to confuse, but it's worth repeating. February 13th, voters will vote in a special election based on the current lines, but as you just said, there could potentially be a primary based on new lines in June or maybe in July or in August. Then, of course, the general election in November, which will be based most likely on this new set of lines.

A lot to keep track of, which we will help you with all along the way, listeners, we promise. I'm Brigid Bergin, in today for Brian Lehrer. We're going to take a quick break, but we'll have much more with Albany reporter Jon Campbell and your calls coming up.

[MUSIC - Marden Hill: Hijack]

Brigid Bergin: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. If you're just joining us, I'm Brigid Bergin, in for Brian Lehrer today. My guest is our very own WNYC and Gothamist reporter Jon Campbell, who covers Albany and state politics. Our resident Buffalo Bills fan and arbiter of what is upstate New York. We are talking about redistricting, a major court decision that is set to shake things up in New York with major implications for who controls the House of Representatives.

Jon, we started to see some reaction to this decision from lots of people across the state. I want to start with how Governor Hochul reacted. Here's a clip from earlier this week in an appearance on CNN.

Governor Hochul: I'm not putting my finger on the scale saying it should be good for Democrats or Republicans. It's not my job. My job is to say the process is an independent redistricting commission decides it, and if they can't come to a decision, the state legislature decides, not a rural judge. That's all we're talking about here.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, just something interesting to pull out of that Hochul comment, she talked about the rural judge who decided last year's redistricting case. Do you want to explain what she meant in that comment?

Jon Campbell: Yes, absolutely. We talked about that Republican-filed lawsuit that was decided last year. They initially filed that in Steuben County, which is way out west of Elmira, New York. It's in the southern tier of New York state, and it was a Republican [inaudible 00:19:53]. Now it was a largely Democratic court at the mid-level that also sided with Republicans on this and the Court of Appeals, which was entirely appointed by Democrats that also cited here.

It's a little disingenuous to suggest that it was only a rural judge that decided this. There were a lot of Democratic courts as well that decided this, but he is the one, this rural Judge Patrick McAllister who happens to have been in the county. He is the one who picked the special master Jonathan Cervas. A lot of Democrats have raised a red flag about that, even though the maps in general, nobody really took an issue with in terms of gerrymandering or making an argument on that front.

Brigid Bergin: Let's go to Alan in Brooklyn. Alan, you're on WNYC.

Alan: Good morning. It's technically Alan from Brooklyn, technically in Florida visiting my sick mother right now, but it's the same person.

Brigid Bergin: Well, thank you for clarifying that.

Alan: I attended most of the redistricting commission hearings the last few years with different offices, and I found the level of attention to detail and the serious follow-up questions by the commissioners very admirable. They didn't seem to be wasting the time and effort of hundreds of people who showed up at these various hearings. The one thing I found flawed in the whole process is that the law didn't require them to come to a single map.

The idea that they have the option to come up with alternative Republican and Democratic commission member maps should have been barred by the statute so that their reason for being and their salary or whatever authority they have would be based on their coming to a final decision. That, in effect, forced the legislature to get involved here because their choice to take one of the two different maps really was no choice at all.

I think if we're going to have this kind of commission at all, it has to be something that gives the legislature a single map to consider and they either say yes or no to that map, not pick A or B. It's bad enough that we have such a--

Brigid Bergin: Alan, thank you so much for that comment. I will tell you that, Jon, Alan's concern over the process and the structure of this commission, this notion that it is something that voters selected is something that our listeners are texting [unintelligible 00:22:29] about raising some concerns. One listener texts, "Please don't say that voters decided this procedure. The ballot amendment was conceived by Cuomo," who was governor at the time, "and passed by the legislature twice before voters had a chance to vote, definitely should be reformed with a citizen-led commission."

Are you hearing in the reporting these similar critiques of just the structure of how we're going through this process?

Jon Campbell: Yes. I think what the caller was referring to there is that the commission, even when they handed up a set of maps last year, they handed up two sets, it was a Democratic set and a Republican-drawn set. The legislature actually rejected both of those and then took over on its own. Yes, that is certainly something that could happen again, and that's just what the structure of this commission allows, and it would retake a constitutional amendment to change it.

There was an opportunity in, I believe it was 2018 or 2019, I can't remember off the top of my head, to make some changes about what happens when the commission deadlocks, et cetera, and voters rejected those changes. To the texter's point as well, yes, it was conceived by Governor Cuomo and state lawmakers, but it was presented to voters. That's the constitutional amendment process.

It has to be approved by two straight sessions of the state legislature and then separately elected sessions with the state legislature, I should say, and then it goes to voters for a yes or no vote, and voters did approve it back in 2014.

Brigid Bergin: Let's go to David in Great Neck. David, you're on WNYC.

David: Hi, I'm in Great Neck, New York. I live in the 3rd CD, and I also live [unintelligible 00:24:21] Legislator Pilip and legislative district, so she is my legislator. Well, as I've said before on the program, the Democratic Party in Nassau County is very, very weak. There's no organization and it's led by [unintelligible 00:24:40], but Tom Suozzi is basically independent and an excellent organizer, and of course, he's well known. Pilip is totally unknown outside of Great Neck and Manhasset where she's been a legislator for just less than two years.

Brigid Bergin: David, let me jump in for a second because this is your district and you know it very well, but for our listeners outside of the 3rd congressional district, what David is talking about is the special election candidates for the 3rd congressional district. Just yesterday, the Nassau County Republican Party announced that Nassau County Legislator Mazi Pilip will be their nominee for that seat, the Republican nominee.

She happens to be a registered Democrat, but she's serving in the Nassau County legislature as a Republican, has been twice elected to that body as a Republican, and the Democrats selected former Congressman Tom Suozzi who represented most of that district prior to the redistricting process, and that vote will come based on the current district lines on February 13.

David, it sounds like you have a strong opinion about who you'll be voting for, but since we're talking about redistricting, do you have any concerns about how the lines changing might impact this race after a February 13 special election?

David: I have no idea what the future map is going to be. Obviously, we in the 3rd CD will vote on the current 3rd CD map. Now, what the redrawn 3rd CD, or maybe it will have a different number, I have no idea. I will make one prediction. I'm actually reading Judge Wilson's opinion from the Court of Appeals from the other day about how it's so important that we have independent and fair districts in the state of New York. I'm going to predict that any new map will not be as gerrymandered as that map that the judge upstate threw out.

People might recall that, but my 3rd CD, which is Nassau County and a part of Queens, was also supposed to include a part of Westchester County. Totally ridiculous. I predict that won't happen. I have no idea what they're going to do, but I do think they'll pay attention.

Brigid Bergin: David, thank you so much for your call. Jon, any reactions to either of those callers and David making the prediction that this next map will likely not be as partisan in one way or the other as the first that was thrown out?

Jon Campbell: Well, it can't be because then it would get tied up in the courts again. There is a thought amongst some observers, and the caller is one of them apparently, that perhaps Democrats will try to make smaller changes rather than bigger changes because bigger changes could get us right back in this whole mess again, because as we said, the Constitution prohibits maps from being drawn to benefit a particular party, a particular candidate. That is the line that they're going to have to walk as we go through this process here to ensure that they come up with a map that does not violate that provision.

We should also know too that the Court of Appeals, there was one big change on the Court of Appeals from the decision last year that Republicans won, and the decision this year that Democrats won, Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, she's no longer on the court. She was replaced by Rowan Wilson, then Rowan Wilson's spot was replaced by a judge by the name Caitlin Halligan, who recused herself from this position. That seventh-judge position on the top court made a lot of difference here and could make a lot of difference if Republicans were to sue for gerrymandering again.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, when we think about possible scenarios for next year, we've touched on already-- we know that there's court action that could be likely, but 2022, we had those two primary elections and August primary as you talked about, is that something we could be looking at, again, for this upcoming year? I guess because it's a presidential election year, maybe turnout could be a little bit higher because people may be paying attention to elections perhaps in a different way, but it's not a great thing for certainly our democracy or for voters to ask them to go to the polls over and over and over.

Jon Campbell: Yes. What we saw last year in 2022, local primary elections were one day, and congressional primaries were another. It's a possibility for next year if this gets drawn out in the courts once again. We should note that there are two primaries next year. There's the presidential primary and then there's the congressional and local primary and the state primary next year as well because state legislative seats will be on the ballot as well.

There are two primaries, but that's a little different because it's the presidential year. The scenario last year, where you had an August primary only for the congressional seats, that was kind of a doomsday scenario from a democracy standpoint, a small-d democracy standpoint. Is it possible? Sure, it's possible, but it's all going to depend on how the commission plays out and then what Democratic lawmakers do about it and then what Republicans decide to do to counter that.

Brigid Bergin: Our friend, Politico's Bill Mahoney, wrote about some possible changes to the congressional map the commission or lawmakers might make. Is there a particular district that you think will be targeted and how much do you think it might change? We know this is all very speculative, we're not going to hold you to it. Just things that you are watching as this process unfolds.

Jon Campbell: Well, we know the handful of districts that congressional Democrats are trying to flip. There's Brandon Williams out in Syracuse. There's Mike Lawler in the Hudson Valley. There's all four seats on Long Island. That's the Santos seat that's going to be up for a special here, then there's Anthony D'Esposito, Nick LaLota, and Garbarino out on Long Island. Those are the seats where I'm going to be watching and most people are going to be watching.

I think the Lawler district, in particular, is one that bears watching because that is a-- all these districts went for Biden from a small margin to a larger margin. That is the district that Biden did pretty well in, but Mike Lawler, a freshman Republican, he still won. He defeated Sean Patrick Maloney who was the chair of the Democratic Congressional Committee. That is one of the top Democratic targets in the entire country.

That is the seat where if it goes further south into Westchester, that could be a problem for Lawler, but if it goes into the more conservative areas, upstate, if you will, then that could be good for Lawler. That is the district where I think most people are going to have their eyes most fascinated towards.

Brigid Bergin: Sure.

Jon Campbell: That includes me.

Brigid Bergin: You also had a really interesting interview that maybe you can paraphrase a bit for us with the Westchester County executive, George Latimer, who is going to be running in a primary against Congressman Jamaal Bowman. These aren't necessarily just general election issues that could be impacted, we could also see some primaries that are impacted. What did Latimer tell you this week?

Jon Campbell: George Latimer is the Westchester County executive who has been a politician dating back to the '80s. He's never lost a seat. He launched a very high-profile Democratic primary against Jamaal Bowman, the Bronx Congressman, Democrat, progressive member of the squad. That is a huge primary. That is a battle of two heavyweights. Redistricting can make a huge difference in that too because if the line as it is right now, that district, it has one neighborhood in the Bronx. It used to have, say, Co-op City, which would've been reliable for Bowman, a more progressive area.

If those lines were to change and it had less of Westchester and more of the Bronx, George Latimer basically told me, "We know how that's going to go. I'm going to lose that race." If it were to shift the other way and say there's more of Westchester or the district remains the same, which is largely a Westchester County district, that could play well for George Latimer, who is well known there, and like I said, has never lost an election there.

Brigid Bergin: Jon, just to put a fine point on it in terms of why this is so important in a national context, when we talk about control of the House, it's not just a matter of who holds the speaker's gavel, although right now it is Mike Johnson of Louisiana. If Democrats were to take control, it would likely be Congressman Hakeem Jeffries of Brooklyn, longtime guest of this show, but what the House can get done and where it focuses its energy is really what's going to be at stake.

Just this week, House members in a party-line vote authorized an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. All of the freshman Republican members from New York voted in favor of that. Jon, any sense of how positions like that play here in New York?

Jon Campbell: Well, we know statewide, New York is deeply state. It has not [unintelligible 00:34:40] Republican-preferred president since Ronald Reagan won in a landslide in 1984. Anything where you're talking about impeachment of the president, in this case, we're talking about an impeachment inquiry into the president, that is going to draw a lot of eyeballs in these marginal districts that we brought up. The Long Island districts and Michael Lawler in the Hudson Valley, Marc Molinaro in the Hudson Valley. All of them are in districts that Biden won.

Michael Lawler is in a district that Biden won 55-45 over Trump in 2020. Those votes could swing a district. If you have people who are sticking with Biden, and that is a big if, quite frankly, then this vote might offend them. Now, you've seen the Republicans try to draw a line here. Mike Lawler said, "I'm not voting for impeachment, I'm voting for an inquiry." He's trying to draw that line there.

You also had people like Nick LaLota say, "Hey, I'm just trying to keep both parties accountable here. I just voted to expel George Santos, he's a Republican. Now I'm voting for an inquiry into the Democratic president." That's how you're seeing them try to spin what was, in theory, a tough vote.

Brigid Bergin: Well, there is a lot more to watch and a lot more coming on this, but we're going to leave it there for now. My guest has been Jon Campbell, Albany reporter for WNYC and Gothamist. Jon, thanks as always for joining me.

Jon Campbell: Thank you, Brigid.

 

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.