Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

American's Feeling About Trump and Judges; Judge Grants Freedom in Missing Student Case; Chief Justice Issues Rare Rebuke; Voters Say Dems Must Do More to Combat Trump; Answering Questions on Cooking Oils and Fats; Powerful Storm Moves Across U.S. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired March 19, 2025 - 08:30   ET

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

[08:30:00]

JESSICA HASBUN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This came after Konanki's parents, like you said, urged Dominican authorities to officially declare their daughter dead just this Monday as they believe she drowned with no evidence of foul play while on spring break at the Riu Republica hotel.

The sheriff from Konanki's hometown supporting their claim, said there was no foul play suspected.

Gravis (ph) petition involved his rights being violated by being kept under restrictions without charges. His attorneys argued that he had been detained for at least ten days and recluded (ph) to the hotel. In that hearing Riibe said Tuesday he had been trying to help with the investigation. But at this point, all he wants is to get his life back and go home to Iowa. He testified he had been held for at least ten days and wanted to return home. While prosecutors stated he was only a witness and had not been formally detained. Riibe's father also testified at that hearing that his son had been restricted from leaving his hotel without his passport or phone.

Sudiksha Konanki, that University of Pittsburgh student, was last seen on March 6th drinking at a hotel bar and headed to the beach at the Riu Republica hotel. Riibe had explained to prosecutors he and Konanki were swept into the ocean by that intense wave, and after trying to save her, he lost sight of her.

It's unclear at this point when Riibe will be returning to the United States, and when he will get back his passport to return home.

John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Important new developments with still more to watch.

Great to have you there. Thank you so much.

All right, President Trump issues a new attack on a federal judge just hours after Chief Justice John Roberts released a rare warning to stop attacking judges.

And then the cooking oil controversies. New reporting on what to use in the kitchen to stay healthy.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:36:35]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: The Department of Justice has until noon today to give a federal judge details on the Trump administration's recent deportation flights of alleged gang members from Venezuela. The judge is looking into the timing to determine if the DOJ defied his orders to temporarily suspend those flights. Trump attacked the judge mercilessly for that ruling, causing the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court to rebuke his comments.

CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten joining me now.

Trump said on Fox interview last night that he would not defy a judge's orders, but there are questions about whether he already has.

So, how do Americans feel about the idea that he might even defy a judge order?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Yes, there is a few reasons why Donald Trump made those statements last night. First off, he doesn't want to upset the judge. But second off, the American people do not - do not want Trump to defy court rulings, all right. You rarely see numbers like this.

So, Trump follow court rulings. Look at this, 84 percent of all adults. That's near uniformity. In this day and age. You rarely ever see 92 percent of Democrats, 82 percent of independents, 79 percent of Republicans agree on anything. But they do agree on this. They may disagree over Donald Trump, but they all agree that he must follow court rulings. To cross that Rubicon is a big no no in the eyes of the American public.

When the court comes down with a ruling, the American public concurs with each other, that is, Donald Trump must follow those court rulings, even if he doesn't like them.

SIDNER: I mean only dogs could get this kind of approval rating. This is incredibly telling.

ENTEN: This - this a Mother Theresa - it crosses the Mother Theresa line.

SIDNER: Yes.

ENTEN: She had about an 80 percent favorable rating when she passed.

SIDNER: OK. So, what do Americans think about whether or not he will defy or not defy a court? Where are they on that?

ENTEN: Yes, this is where it gets interesting. They all pretty much agree that he should follow court rulings. But when it comes to whether he will follow court rulings, this is where there's big disagreement. SIDNER: Wow.

ENTEN: Will Trump follow court rulings when the courts rule against him? Look at the majority number here, 58 percent are not confident that he will, compared to just 42 percent who are confident that he will. So, I think this news that's come out over the past 48 hours, will he, won't he? He, of course, says he will. But the idea that he wouldn't, that finds a home in the American public. That pretty much goes with what they think might very well happen because 58 percent of the public is not confident that Trump will, in fact, follow court rulings.

SIDNER: So, do Americans think that Trump is overstepping his authority at this point as they watch all of this play out and see some of the things he's been saying?

ENTEN: Yes, this kind of follows the narrative, right? That's what's so dangerous for - for Donald Trump on this.

You know, I was talking with our dear friend Mr. Berman, who's over there at the desk before.

SIDNER: Who?

ENTEN: John Berman. You may have heard of him.

SIDNER: Never.

ENTEN: Never heard of him?

I was talking with him before and he essentially said, when this becomes a fight over the courts, that all of a sudden is a big issue for Donald Trump. Has Trump exceeded his authority? Again, this follows, right, 57 percent of Americans already say that he has as president, compared to 40 percent say no.

So again, Donald Trump says he won't defy the court rulings. But the idea that he will follows along with the American public because they already think he has exceeded his authority as president.

SIDNER: It is fascinating, these numbers. Thank you so much, Harry Enten.

ENTEN: Thank you.

SIDNER: All the energy in the world. We will like some more of that.

ENTEN: I'll try and deliver it.

SIDNER: Over to, oh, John Berman.

ENTEN: Mr. Berman.

SIDNER: Mr. Berman.

BERMAN: The aforementioned, shall we say. All right, with us now, Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst, professor at Georgetown University Law Center.

[08:40:05]

Professor, thank you so much for being with us.

There's a lot to discuss here. And you've written incredibly eloquently and incisively on all of these subjects. Let me first start with the chief justice of the United States and the speed with which he came out with his, let's call it a rebuke. What does that tell you?

STEVE VLADECK, CNN SUPREME COURT ANALYST: You know, John, it's (INAUDIBLE) Chief Justice Roberts is actually, you know, watching the news that he (INAUDIBLE), you know, growing momentum on the part of the White House and Trump to try to delegitimize these district court (INAUDIBLE). Just this growing mountain of district court rulings against the Trump administration's policies.

And, you know, John, it's not the most strongly worded statement, but the fact that he felt impelled to speak at all and to speak so soon after President Trump had called for the impeachment of D.C. Chief Judge, you know, Jeb Boasberg, I think is really striking and a sign that John Roberts, you know, is worried about this and thinks that it's time for this rhetoric to stop.

BERMAN: And basically saying, appeal, do not call to impeach or attack.

VLADECK: Yes. And, you know, when he's - when he - when Chief Justice Roberts says that, you know, for over two centuries, what he's talking about is, you know, we set a very important precedent early in American history when Congress impeached a federalist appointed Supreme Court justice named Samuel Chase, and the Senate refused to convict him because the principle charges against Chase were that he was issuing decisions that people didn't like, that he was too partisan in his rulings. That's an important precedent, John, for judicial independence, not independence, to do whatever judges want, whenever they want, but for judges to rule within the confines of our legal system, where the proper remedy for getting things wrong is to appeal their decisions, not to ignore them.

BERMAN: Now, I want to talk about the law itself in question. The Alien Enemies Act. Which is, how the White House justified the deportation of these people they claim are Venezuelan gang members.

After this judge, the federal judge stepped in and said, you know what, let's pause here so I can assess this, that's when Donald Trump called for impeachment. That's when Republican lawmakers started attacking all kinds of people, including the judge, directly.

Yet I think you were the first, and I think the loudest to note, when you look at the Alien Enemies Act, the actual language of the act, the law, talks specifically about judicial review.

VLADECK: And, you know, John, not just the language of the statute going all the way back to 1798, but the way it was used during the War of 1812, during World War I, during World War II.

John, there are literally dozens of cases, indeed in World War II, hundreds of cases where people who we were holding as, you know, alleged alien enemies would go into court and say, hey, I'm not actually German, I'm Swiss. Or, hey, I'm not actually Italian, I'm American. And, you know, sometimes they would win those cases, John, sometimes they would lose them. But even in a context in which no one disputed that this statute was properly invoked by President Roosevelt, there was still meaningful judicial review of whether each individual person against whom the act was used was properly subject to it.

There's no argument here for why the Trump administration should be allowed to short circuit that process, even if it's OK for them to apply the statute to Tren de Aragua.

BERMAN: And again, if you look at the law here, it has language like, it shall be the duty of the courts. The several judges, et cetera, et cetera. Just the language in the law talks about judicial review, talks about exactly what this judge says he should be doing right now.

So, when you hear Stephen Miller from the White House, when you hear Congressman Tim Burchett on this show yesterday, you know, blow a gasket politically, saying, this is impinging on the president's constitutional rights to conduct foreign policy, what do you say to that?

VLADECK: I mean, I say that the president's right to conduct foreign policy to protect national security is not absolute and never has been. And if it was critical, if it was - if it was required, John, in the middle of World War II for federal courts to open their doors to people we were holding as alien enemies because we said they were German, it should be no less required today.

Now, John, the other argument they're making, which I think is worth addressing, is that some of this is based on classified national security information that they can't be required to show that in court. The problem with that argument is that in 1996 Congress specifically contemplated that problem, and Congress provided a very specific, highly protective of national security process for removing what the statute called alien terrorists.

[08:45:01]

There's even a court that we've never used called the Alien Terrorist Removal Court. John, again, there's lots of power in these statutes if, but only if, the government follows due process.

BERMAN: There's a path. There is a clear path here that the White House could use.

Steve Vladeck, really terrific explanation of all this. People should go read everything you've written on this as well. It's really instructive.

VLADECK: Thanks, John. BERMAN: And people should tune in to CNN throughout the day. Coming up a little bit later on "THE SITUATION ROOM," an interview with former Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right, thank you so much, John.

Members of Congress continuing to face a whole lot of anger and frustration from voters back home. In a town hall in Nebraska last night, people booed and heckled Republican Congressman Mike Flood over tariffs, Ukraine and the job that DOGE is doing.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE FLOOD (R-NE): How can you be against a balanced budget?

CROWD: (INAUDIBLE).

FLOOD: How can you be against a balanced budget?

CROWD: (INAUDIBLE)

FLOOD: All right.

CROWD: (INAUDIBLE).

FLOOD: All right. All right.

CROWD: Tax the rich! Tax the rich! Tax the rich!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: They are screaming "tax the rich" over and over and over again.

The anger in the country pointed mostly at Republicans. But Democrats facing some of that anger too. In Maryland last night, Democratic Congressman Glenn Ivey hearing from frustrated constituents that his party isn't doing enough to push back against President Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are not interested in hearing that you are in the minority. We know that. We want you to show some of the backbone and strategic brilliance that Mitch McConnell would have in the minority.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We want you to show fight. and you are not fighting.

(END VIDEO CLIP) SIDNER: CNN's Brian Todd was at that town hall and spoke to Congressman Ivey afterwards.

I am curious what he said. You know, the Republicans have told their group not to go out and do these town halls. Credit due to those who do show up. Now Democrats are getting it. What is he saying about all this?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, the congressman, Sara, was very measured last night in responding to all of this. I'm going to get to this clip in just a second. But what you heard that constituents say, and the anger expressed, is a central theme at these Democratic town halls all across the country. And what we heard last night in Forestville, Maryland, at that event, and what you're hearing at these town halls with the Democrats is, people complaining you're not fighting hard enough, where is your plan, where is your messaging? That is the real complaint.

I caught up with Congressman Ivey after the event, and I asked him about that anger and whether he's going to show any fight and any anger, as that one constituent had asked him to do.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. GLENN IVEY (D-MD): I don't know that expressing anger necessarily is the way to do that per se, especially if you're trying to win over persuadable voters who aren't looking for the angry - the - frankly, the angry black man isn't necessarily going to be the one that wins over votes in the districts we need to win.

I'm not here to put on a show. We're here to win.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: Now, Congressman Ivey kept his composure all night, even with angry exchanges like the one you heard a moment ago.

And he was actually complimented on that by one constituent who said, you know, you're really smart and you're really polite, but those are for normal times. These are not normal times. And she yelled at him, we need you to be less polite. She asked him if he would be willing to get down and dirty and go to protests and get arrested to advance the Democrats' causes. And Congressman Ivey said that he would be willing to do that.

Sara.

SIDNER: Interesting that the constituents wanting them to have fire in their belly. We will see what happens as this plays out town hall after town hall as we get closer and closer to when, 2026.

Brian Todd, thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

John.

BERMAN: So great to see Brian Todd here in the morning. SIDNER: It is. Hello, Brian Todd.

BERMAN: All right, this morning, new video shows the moment the roof of a grocery store collapsed, injuring store employees.

And millions of Americans under severe weather warnings as a new, dangerous storm system gears up to bring powerful winds, dust, fires, and, yup, blizzards across the country.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:53:42]

BERMAN: All right, this morning, new developments in the cooking oil controversy. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. is pushing the health benefits - what he calls the health benefits of beef tallow. So, are animal fats really healthier for you than seed oils? We asked you to send in our questions - your questions. And chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta is here to answer them.

Sanjay, great to see you.

Will from New Jersey asks, "which cooking oil contributes to increasing one's cholesterol levels? Which cooking oil helps lowering your bad cholesterol?"

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: There's two types of fats that we're talking about here in cooking oil, saturated fats, unsaturated fats. And we put this chart together because I want people to be able to see this. We'll put it online as well. But basically looking at all the different types of fats and figuring out what is saturated, what is unsaturated. As a general rule, maybe we could take that full screen full so people can actually see it on the screen. But if it's solid at room temperature, that's generally going to have a lot more saturated fat in it. Just sort of a rule of thumb.

But you can see there, you know, coconut oil, the tropical oils, palm tree oil, but also butter and beef tallow very high in saturated fats. So, that's the concern. I mean we used to use animal fats to cook quite exclusively for a long time.

[08:55:02]

And then the middle of the last century, we started - stopped using it as much because of the concerns about heart disease.

In terms of what can actually improve your cholesterol, avocado oil, olive oil. I put those at the top of the list.

BERMAN: Sanjay, you addressed this a little bit yesterday, but Sandra from Wisconsin asks, "what kind of oil should you use when cooking at high temperatures?"

GUPTA: Yes, this is one of the big questions because, you know, one of the unanswered questions about these oils, when you cook them at high temperature, what other chemicals do they give off? So, there's been a lot of studies on this. And I'll make it quite simple for you in terms of what are the best sort of high temperature oils, extra virgin olive oil, olive oil, just regular virgin olive oil, coconut oil is pretty good for that, stable when heated pretty hot, peanut oil and, again, avocado oil. So, olive oil and avocado oil, they really are good at both, unsaturated fats and high smoke points.

There was concerns, John, for some time that avocado oil and olive oil, at that high smoke point, would give off a lot of these chemicals. So, that's been studied pretty recently. And they hold up pretty well. That means they stay pretty stable even at high temperatures.

BERMAN: Oh, that is interesting.

All right. Dorothy asks, what about coconut oil, is that bad to use for cooking?

GUPTA: You know, this is one of those things where you have to sort of ask yourself what your goals are. I got a bad family history of heart disease, so I'm worried about saturated fats. Coconut oil is high in calories. It's high in saturated fats.

Some people love it. It does have - seem to have a lot of what is known as lauric acid. That's one of those medium chain triglycerides. People who follow this, the MCTs, could have some benefit overall for your health. But you got to - you got - so, in moderation, probably OK, but you've got to be able to be comfortable with the extra calories and the extra saturated fat.

BERMAN: All right, and this is sort of the million dollar question for people who follow some of the language coming out of the Health and Human Services Department right now. Curtis asks, "is beef tallow better than seed oils?"

GUPTA: Look, you know, the thing about seed oils, and I think part of the controversy is, there's no question seed oils are highly processed. There's no question that they can be pro-inflammatory. They increase something known as linoleic acid. And some of the seed oils that we were just talking about, they may decompose or degrade at higher temperatures.

But there's a lot of saturated fat in butter and beef tallow. And that's part of the reason people started to move away from them, again, in the middle of the last century. So, someone like me, a guy in his mid-50s, worried about heart disease, I'm going to stay away from that stuff in favor of things more like canola oil or olive oil, which tends to lower your bad cholesterol and tends to have a pretty good smoke point. So, you know, you can cook with just about anything with olive oil.

BERMAN: Yes, and, look, you're using a lot of language that shows up in my cholesterol report from my annual physical every year. And I appreciate that.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, great to see you. Thank you very much.

GUPTA: You got it.

BERMAN: Sara.

SIDNER: Hmm, butter. Sweet butter. All right, I'll give it up.

OK, new this morning, the Trump administration has released thousands of records on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Many of the files have already been made public, it turns out, but the White House says those released Tuesday were previously classified and redacted. Researchers will need time to obviously go through these documents. Conspiracy theorists, though, maybe calm yourselves because at least one source telling CNN there really is no indication that the files will contain anything like a bombshell or information that could change the current conclusion as to what happened, that a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, was responsible for JFK's death.

And some terrifying moments caught on camera. Watch this. Whoa! A part of a roof collapsed at a grocery store in California. Modesto fire officials say two people were injured in that collapse. Officials are still investigating what caused the collapse, but say severe weather that passed through just before the incident might have been one of the major factors.

John.

BERMAN: All right, this morning, blinding dust, powerful winds, dangerous thunderstorms. A new cross-country storm is putting millions of people at risk. It is expected to strengthen as it moves across the country.

Let's get right to CNN meteorologist Allison Chinchar with the latest.

Allison.

ALLISON CHINCHAR, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Yes, that's right. You can see the video behind me. This was from New Mexico yesterday. Again, the visibility on what is supposed to be a road behind me is pretty much zero. This was shot out of the windshield and windows. Now you can slowly start to see some of the cars appear now that the dust is starting to calm back down.

But again, this was yesterday. We're still going to see a lot of these winds continuing to tick up throughout the day today as we go through just different parts of the country. So, you're going to start to see more of them begin to spread across portions of Texas, Oklahoma and portions of Nebraska.

But you also have those winds taking the snow that's falling and turning it into a blizzard for several areas. Look at all of this snow that's coming down across portions of Iowa, Kansas, and even into Nebraska. And very strong thunderstorms out ahead of it. Lots of lightning in some of these.

[09:00:01]

And the transition is very quick. Take a look at Omaha. This almost looks kind of like a box of crayons just exploded all over the radar.