Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Decisions Regarding Student Loan Forgiveness May Have An Impact On Economy; According To The Man At The Center Of Supreme Court's LGBTQ Rights Case, He Never Requested the Creation of Wedding Website; Recent Developments Regarding Key Individual, Web Designer's Eligibility To File A Supreme Court Case In Doubt; Russia's War On Ukraine; Zelenskyy: Wagner Uprising Proves Putin Is "Weak"; For One Month, Wagner States It Will Halt Hiring; Overnight, Russia Launched 17 Attack Drones Toward Ukraine; Researchers: Grazing Could Reduce Emissions. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired July 03, 2023 - 10:30   ET

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

[10:30:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN NEWS CENTRAL CO-ANCHOR: So, how much of a dent could this make in consumer, spending consumer sentiment, things that drive the economy?

RAHEL SOLOMON, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so important for the economy, right, John? So, it's really been remarkable how well the U.S. consumer has done over this last year or so, despite the interest rate increases, despite the inflation.

And so, the question now is, well, how does this impact that? A few estimates going around. Greg Vallier (ph), he's a policy strategist, he put the estimate at about $70 billion. He said, it is obviously a headwind. So, $70 billion dollars coming out of the economy, as people will pay back these student loans payments. Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's, he put it differently. According to his calculations, he put it in GDP terms, John. He said, it's about shaving a quarter of one percent off of GDP annually.

That said, the census that this will not be a major blow, but if it -- it's your household, if it's your budget, it may feel differently. And one thing I can tell you people are watching really closely is the timing of this. So, when interests -- when these payments resume in October, it will coincide with what appear to be, perhaps, a slowdown that is already taking shape. We have heard Bank of Americus say, even according to their most recent data in June, they are seeing consumers pull back. We had some research from the Feds, from the Fed staffers suggested that all of the excess savings that the U.S. had saved over the pandemic is depleted.

And so, it is the timing of this that maybe this, in and of itself, is not enough to cause a significant dent to the U.S. economy, but watch the space, because there will be a lot of things that seem to be happening around the same time, John.

BERMAN: In theory, shouldn't it also be deflationary? SOLOMON: Well, some have said that. It depends on what side of the argument you're on. Will it pull back consumer spending? Yes. But will it do so in such a way that it is de-inflationary (ph)? You know, I'm not sure, because the impact to the larger economy is also expected to be marginal. But that is what argument you were hearing, that this will get people to spend less, which of course the Federal Reserve would like to see. Does the Biden administration want to see people pulling back really cash strapped? I don't know.

BERMAN: That's a great point. There are, sort of, conflicting increase at work all at the same time here. Rahel, we appreciate you putting it all on perspective. Thank you.

Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN NEWS CENTRAL CO-ANCHOR: All right. This morning, new revelations about the case at the center of the Supreme Court's LGBTQ rights versus First Amendment rights ruling. On Friday, the Court's conservative majority ruled that a Colorado web designer, her name is Laurie Smith, could refuse to create websites for same sex couples' weddings on free speech grounds.

In court filings, she had put in there that a man, only listed as Stewart, requested her services to create designs and other materials for his same sex wedding. Now, here is the rub, CNN and other reporters found Stewart through information contained in those court filings, but he told CNN he never made that request. He's not gay and has been happily married to a woman for the past 15 years.

Here to discuss the potential implication of all of this, if any, CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig. OK. So, the first this is, does this change, in any way, the Supreme Court's ruling? Is there any chance that they would go back to the case and say, hold on a second, this, we need to look into?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, AND FORMER FEDERAL AND STATE PROSECUTOR: Realistically, no, Sara. Because when the Supreme Court decided this case, they did it what's called a stipulation, meaning the parties agreed to certain facts. And they did it, really, largely, on a hypothetical which is so unusual, which courts are, frankly, not supposed to do. They said, well, this web designer is going to go into be business. She is, in the future, intending to deny services to LGBTQ couples, and the State of Colorado intends to enforce its anti- discrimination law, therefore, we sort of have this inevitable future collision between these Two.

The statements about this Stewart person happened in lower courts. But I think the Supreme Court was wary of that and tried to work their way around it. But the big problem here is, you said the key word, standing. The Supreme Court is now deciding cases where there would not, traditionally, be standing and that's led to an expansion of the Supreme Court's power.

SIDNER: Can we talk about just how this ended up in the case and why? Initially, she went to federal court to sue the State of Colorado because of that anti-discrimination law, right? And the court there questioned her standing, and then her attorneys in chief put this new information that actually she had been asked for a website in the court filing. This has gone on for seven years. So, when you look at the federal court and the state, they are looking for standing, but the Supreme Court decided they didn't need standing or they decided that they had standing?

HONIG: They expanded what anyone has ever understood standing to think about it. It has -- let's just -- let's talk about standing for a minute. That's the notion that you cannot bring a case unless you have an actual case or controversy. You can't say, OK, courts this thing might happen in the future, therefore we want your opinion now.

And this is a perfect example of why? Because you need a factual record. Every ruling by every court, Supreme Court on down, is specific to the fact of those cases. And if you're just dealing in, sort of, abstract hypotheticals, then you end up with this type of situation which really harmful to, I think, people's trust in the way our decisions get made.

[10:35:00]

SIDNER: Speaking of trust, I mean, the people and the public who disagreed with this ruling, and this is the law of the land now. They look at this and they're saying, well, this seems like there was some misguided work on the part of the plaintiff in this particular case. Have you ever seen something where their facts were inaccurate in a case that has gotten all the way to the Supreme Court?

HONIG: No, because by the time a real case, an actual case gets to the Supreme Court, the facts have been litigated. That's why, you have to go through the district court, the Court of Appeals first. And usually by the time you get to the Supreme Court, you will have a factual record. They will say, what's contained in this appendix that you have to file, it could be hundreds of thousands of pages, these are the facts of the case, and you argue accordingly. And so, you avoid this type of situation where people go, gee, that decision may have based on faulty facts.

Sometimes, there's a bit of a dispute about the facts but at least you have a concrete set of what the facts are. And here, if the Supreme Court is going to continues to reach farther and farther to take cases that are abstract, this could be a recurring problem. It's really -- it's not for anyone's benefit, ultimately. I know someone always wins and someone always loses.

It's not for the benefit of the parties, it certainly not for the benefit of the Supreme Court, and it's not for the benefit for the public. There's a reason for this. You know, standing is, sort of, sometimes seen as a boring technical requirement but there's a reason for it because we want our courts making reliable rulings on set issues of fact.

SIDNER: And they didn't take other cases, this session, because of standing.

HONIG: Yes.

SIDNER: So, it's interesting to note.

HONIG: Well, let me say that -- the traditional conservative view of what judges should do is judges should be as narrow as possible. I take cases only sparingly and only if there is absolutely standing in other jurisdictional requirements. This is not judicial conservatism. I mean lower case (ph) say, this is judicial activism.

SIDNER: Wow. Elie Honig, thank you so much.

HONIG: Thank you.

SIDNER: John.

BERMAN: Ukraine's president sitting down with CNN for an exclusive interview. Hear what he said about the failed revolt inside Russia and what it means for Vladimir Putin's leadership.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00]

BERMAN: In an exclusive interview with CNN's Erin Burnett, Ukraine's President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, says, last month's Wagner revolt in Russia shows that Vladimir Putin is weak and is losing control of his own people.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Yes, we see reaction after certain Wagner steps. We see Putin's reaction, it's weak. Firstly, we see he doesn't control everything. Wagner is moving deep into Russia and taking certain region shows how easy it is to do. Putin doesn't control the situation in the regions. He doesn't control the security situation.

All of us understand that his whole army is in Ukraine, almost entire army is there. That's why it's so easy for the Wagner troops to march through Russia. Who could have stopped him? We understand that Putin doesn't control the regional policy, and he doesn't control all those people in the regions. So, all that vertical power he used to have, just got crumbling down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: You can see Erin's full interview with the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy this Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. eastern time.

So, the Wagner mercenary group says it is suspending its recruitment for one month. The group is moving, it says, it's operations to Belarus where the founder, Yevgeny Prigozhin, is believed to be in exile. CNN's Ben Wedeman live in eastern Ukraine for us. So, Ben, what does this all say about the larger issues involving Wagner, such as, where are they going to go, what are they going to do, how long will they be allowed to exist? BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: None of those questions have been answered, John. I mean, what we saw is this message posted on a Telegram channel affiliated with Prigozhin which says that they are stopping recruitment for one month, the Wagner group, because of, "The temporary nonparticipation in the special military operation", Russian speak for the war in Ukraine, and because they're moving to Belarus. It's not at all clear if this is something that's been approved by the Russian government or the government of Belarus.

Now, Alexander Lukashenko, the president of Belarus said on Friday that he was looking forward to Wagner fighters, mercenaries coming to train his military. Previously he said that he was going to make abandoned land available to them, to the Wagner mercenaries. And we've seen satellite footage that shows that in one part of Belarus, it does look like they're preparing to camp. But for instance, Yevgeny Prigozhin, his fate is unknown and his future in doubt. John.

BERMAN: Ben, you are in eastern Ukraine which has seen so much of the fighting over the last several months. It's also the area where much of the Ukrainian counteroffensive appears to be focused. What's the lates on where things stand?

WEDEMAN: At the moment, we're seeing very modest progress at best. We heard the deputy defense minister say that within the last week in total, south -- in the southern area of Zaporizhzhia, as well as eastern Ukraine around Bakhmut, in total, they have managed to take 14 square miles, that's not very much.

[10:45:00]

And in fact, to the northeast of here, there's an area where the Russians are actually making a counteroffensive of their own. What we've seen is that the Russian have -- had months to prepare for this counteroffensive. They're dug in deep. They have a lot of artillery. They've apparently moved thousands of their men from other areas of the 600-long front -- mile long front to the Bakhmut area.

Now, we've spoken with, not only Ukrainian troops, but also Russian prisoners of war. The Russian prisoners of war tell us that morale is low, supplies are bad, the leadership is disorganized. But nonetheless, the Russians, perhaps simply by sheer strength of numbers, are able to fight back, hold the line, and in some areas, move forward. John.

BERMAN: All right. Ben Wedeman for us in eastern Ukraine. Stay safe, Ben. Thank you very much.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right. Coming up, a revolutionary new way to tackle the climate crisis. And it involves making cows part of the solution. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:50:00]

SIDNER: Cows and other livestock are known to be major contributors to climate change. They account for more than 14 percent of so-called, man-made carbon emissions. But some scientists are now arguing that cows can actually be part of the solution. How? CNN's Chief Climate Correspondent Bill Weir explains.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL WEIR, CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT (voiceover): In the beginning was the buffalo. Tens of millions of them wandering land, munching wild grasses, and using poop and hoofs to create rich, fertile soil up to 15 feet deep.

WEIR: Look at this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

WEIR (voiceover): But since Americans replaced buffalo with cows, generation of fertilizers and pesticides, tilling and overgrazing have turned much of that nutrient rich soil into lifeless dirt. But not on the farms where they graze cows just like wild buffalo.

PETER BYCK, ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR, FILMMAKER: Well, so Adaptive multi-paddock grazing, AMP grazing is a way that mimics the way bison have moved across the Great Plains. And so, it's really about the animals hit an area really hard and then they leave it for a long time.

WEIR (voiceover): Peter Byck is a professor at Arizona State University. And he believes that if enough beef and dairy operations copy this simple hack, cattle could actually become an ally in the fight against climate change.

BYCK: I anticipate we'll get a lot of push back because people are not thinking that cows can be a part of the solution.

WEIR: Not only are you going against the graine of environmentalists who think meat is evil --

BYCK: Yes.

WEIR: -- for lots of reasons.

BYCK: Yes.

WEIR: You took money from McDonald's for this.

BYCK: Yes, I asked for money from McDonald's for this. I wanted to go to big companies because if they don't change, we don't get there.

WEIR (voiceover): For his docuseries, "Roots so Deep, You Can See The Devil Down There", Byck assembled a team of scientists.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're really interested in insects that live in poop. WEIR (voiceover): Experts in bugs and birds.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, far boy (ph).

WEIR (voiceover): Cows, soils and carbon. They spent years comparing five sets of neighboring farms in the southeast. On one side, traditional grazers who let cows roam one big field for months at a time and often cut fertilized grass for hay.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Whoa. Come on.

WEIR (voiceover): On the other side, AMP grazers who never mull or fertilize.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You open the gate, they go through. It takes five minutes or a couple, roll up a wire.

WEIR (voiceover): And with a single line of electrical fence move their cows from one patch of high grass to the next.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And that's building fence. This is how easy it is, tater (ph).

WEIR (voiceover): While their science is yet to be published and peer reviewed, Byck says early data has found AMP farms pulling down up to four times the carbon, while holding 25 percent more microbes, three times the bird life, and twice as much rain per hour.

BYCK: If it's a 1,000-acre farm, it's 54 million gallons water that's not washing your soil versus soaking into your land.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Wow, look at this grass.

WEIR (voiceover): But this is also a human experiment to see whether data and respectful discussion can change hearts and minds.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This was grazed about 40 days ago. And this hadn't been fertilized in 12 years.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Awesome.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And when we got out spending money on fertilizing, they were huge. Huge. And I didn't think it could ever happen.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It is such a stress relief. We just don't worry about a lot of it anymore.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And you don't even fertilize when you plant your rye grass?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nothing. It sounds crazy.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But it works.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But just letting mother nature do the work.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

BYCK: Would it be an interesting thing if you didn't have to pay for fertilizer?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wouldn't that be wonderful?

WEIR (voiceover): Curtis Spangler is one of the conventional farmers in "Roots So Deep". And he says, his mind was changed when he realized he now has a way to double his herd and quit his second off-farm job.

CURTIS SPANGLER, TENNESSEE FARMER: Right now, we're having to dump thousands of dollars into nitrogen every year of that. Really, if we just change a couple of things, we might be able to save that money to put it toward other resources.

WEIR: Is that something you're committed to doing now --

SPANGLER: Oh, yes.

WEIR: -- as a result of this patchwork?

SPANGLER: We're really looking and seeing the benefits of it and how we can work it.

WEIR: So, as we hit the height of grilling season, a little food for thought.

[10:55:00]

BYCK: There is ways to produce meat that is not good for the planet, and there's ways to produce meat that's really good for the planet. And that's the nuance that's been missing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WEIR (on camera): And this has been the relationship between land and animals forever up until about World War II, when industrialized farming took over, and others of $200 billion dollar fertilizer industry doesn't want to go away. So, this idea will meet resistance, but it's really interesting to see farmers who never crossed the fence. You know, they're private, they're proud --

SIDNER: That's what I love about it.

WEIR: -- to say, wait a minute, he's got quail over there. I love quail. I want quail. And now, it's a matter of just, sort of, "Keeping Up with the Joneses" in terms of soil health which benefits every living thing.

SIDNER: I think the fascinating thing about this is just how simple it is, just let mother nature do what she does.

WEIR: Yes.

SIDNER: And that people are coming together at writ (ph). So many things divide us. This seems, in that area -- and you also talked to a lot of wonderful characters.

WEIR: Yes.

SIDNER: But came together over this. It's fascinating.

WEIR: It turns out common ground is the ground --

SIDNER: Literally.

WEIR: -- in farm countries especially.

SIDNER: Bill Weir, love to see you.

WEIR: Good to see you, Sara.

SIDNER: John.

BERMAN: Well said.

So, he went missing as a teenager, and now eight years later, a Texas man turns up alive. What we are learning about all of this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]