Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Supreme Court Weighs Biden's Student Loan Forgiveness Plan; Tonight: House Select Committee On China Holds First Hearing; Testimony Resumes In Alex Murdaugh Trial; Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired February 28, 2023 - 10:00   ET

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

[10:00:15]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Top of the hour this Tuesday, I'm Jim Sciutto.

ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: And I'm Erica Hill.

Happening right now, protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court, as the justices hear arguments about President Biden's student loan forgiveness program. Their decision will have a major impact on millions of federal student loan borrowers. Right now, outstanding federal student loan debt stands at a staggering $1.6 trillion.

SCIUTTO: Six Republican led states and two borrowers who do not qualify for this specific program are challenging it. They say it's not legal. So far, at least 26 million people have applied for relief, 16 million were already approved, when those legal challenges put that on hold.

Ahead, we're going to break down the arguments and speak to a student who says there is a clear racial justice aspect to this as well.

We do begin with CNN justice correspondent, Jessica Schneider. She is outside the Supreme Court. Jessica, this has real-life impact for millions of borrowers and their families. Tell us exactly what the judges are considering here.

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jim. So there are political and practical ramifications here. Let me start first with the practical, there are 40 million student loan borrowers who are eligible for this program, 26 million of them have already applied, 16 million had been approved for up to $20,000 in debt forgiveness.

But the thing is right after they were applied and were approved, lower courts actually blocked this program. So if the Supreme Court continues to knock down this program, millions of students will not be eligible for student loan forgiveness.

However, the Biden administration has said that if the Supreme Court approves this program and lets them move forward, that students will be eligible for that debt relief starting 60 days after a decision comes down.

Now for the political implications of this, the Biden administration is arguing that they are justified and have the power to put this program into place under the Heroes Act. That statute actually gives the education secretary the power to waive or modify loan provisions if there is an emergency. And the Biden administration has said that this ongoing COVID pandemic is that emergency and justifies this relief.

However, as we've seen from this court, they are very skeptical of this argument. This court has already blocked the administration multiple times when it comes to their COVID argument. They actually blocked the eviction moratorium for rental payments, and then they blocked a testing or vaccination program for large employers.

So this is a court that is very skeptical of the Biden administration pushing these programs because of COVID. This is a court that is also very skeptical of agency power. So another -- that'll be one argument here that the Biden administration will make, but another argument that will be presented is a bit technical, it revolves around whether the parties in this case, the six Republican states that are suing also two individual students, whether they even have the power to bring this lawsuit. And, guys, that will be the argument that the Biden administration is really banking on here, because if the Supreme Court finds that these parties don't even have standing to bring this lawsuit, they could knock this case out, allow this program to go forward.

But a lot here is on the line. We've got borrowers, advocates rallying at the court behind me, because millions of students are sort of on hold now in limbo waiting to see if up to $20,000 of their debt will be forgiven. Guys.

SCIUTTO: A lot of them had already been approved. They were waiting for that relief. Now they're waiting as -- that's been stated. Jessica Schneider, thanks so much.

Well, this morning, the Education Secretary, Miguel Cardona, spoke with CNN about why the Biden administration believes this plan is so important.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIGUEL CARDONA, UNITED STASTES EDUCATION SECRETARY: Ninety percent of the dollars in this benefit would go to people making under $75,000. So it's not a wholesale cancellation of loans. We're targeting it to people that need it most.

And, you know, with regard to whether or not there's authority, the last administration used the same authority to pause student loans. So if that administration can use it, we can use it as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Joining us now, Desiree Veney, who's a senior at Morgan State University. She's also the Vice President of Morgan State's NAACP chapter. It's great to have you with us this morning.

So, Desiree, you were actually, as I understand it, you had applied for this program, you had already been approved, obviously, that is now on hold. Talk to us about why it's so important for you to be there in D.C. this morning.

DESIREE VENEY, SENIOR, MORGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: Hi, yes. Yes, I was approved. I was fortunately one of the ones that were able to get approved. So it was a great opportunity for that. But it means a lot to me to be here today, not only because it's important. It's a very important day in history to not only me but also my peers.

Being that I am an out-of-state student, I am already at a disadvantage in comparison to my peers. I'm from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and my school is in Baltimore, Maryland. So I pay a large amount of loans and regards to, you know, being out-of-state and things like that. And it already kind of puts me, like I said, at a disadvantage.

[10:05:12]

So with that, I feel like a lot of HBCU students, in general -- student debt, in general, has prevented a lot of HBCU students to engage in many wealth building activities in regards to investing, purchasing homes, and different things like that, that will fill that racial wealth gap that I would say. And I feel like this day is very important, because we are able to utilize our voices and our platforms, so we can be heard.

SCIUTTO: I wonder what this would mean to you and folks who are with you today, $20,000, it's a lot of money. How much would that -- how much of a burden would that take away from you?

VENEY: It will take a lot away from me, considering the fact that I am a Pell Grant recipient. That will clear a lot of my student loans alone. And also, I plan to further my education to get my master's, and then also further after that to get my PhD. So I feel like this will also give me a better opportunity to be able to do that, you know, without as much stress that is already kind of built on my back. And also to give me a little bit more financial security postgrad.

I feel like it will give me a better opportunity to create a stronger and a more stable foundation for my family, and also to create generational wealth afterwards. And also to inspire the ones that are under me. I have a very large family, and I'm the second oldest, and with that, it's a lot of people that are coming into college after me and following my footsteps.

So I feel like with just being here alone, and also having this platform alone, is a very inspirational opportunity to let them know that, you know, we can be heard and we can use our voices. And, you know, it is possible to, you know, just stand up and stand out.

HILL: Yes. A lot of looking up to you, understandably. There's -- when we -- when we look at where we're at now, as we wait on this decision, how do you plan? Because those plans you talk about your desire to pursue your master's, your PhD as well. Are you planning now, looking forward, as if that application that was approved, as if that loan forgiveness is going to come in for you? Or are you planning as if it's not? VENEY: Well, initially coming into college, my freshman year, you know, this whole cancel student debt thing was not even, you know, above surface. So coming into college, I didn't even have that, you know, idea or expectation of it being a thing.

So my kind -- my mindset is already programmed to, you know, continue to do what I've been doing in preparation of paying my loans and things like that postgrad. So, of course, if given this opportunity, it will be a blessing, yes. But, you know, it's kind of like, you know, you pray for the best, but kind of prepare for the worst.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HILL: Yes.

VENEY: And it's an unfortunate circumstance, but, you know, like I said, if granted the opportunity, it will be a blessing, but we still have to continue to push forward and prepare for whatever is coming.

And with being a part of the NAACP, being vice president of my Morgan State chapter, we are very exposed to using our voices, like I said, and using our platforms and things like that. And with that, you know, they just gave me more inspiration to be able to go out on a limb, and also just be confident in whatever that we do and wherever life takes us and things like that, regardless of any adversities that we do face.

And I feel like this is a major adversity that we are facing, but I feel like this will not define me. And it will not stop me from continuing to do what I plan to do.

HILL: Desiree Veney, really appreciate you joining us this morning. We look forward to seeing all that lies ahead for you. Thank you.

VENEY: Thank you. I appreciate this opportunity. And I just wanted to say, you know, to the justices and the lawmakers and things like that, you know, although this is not something that everyone is agreeance on, I feel like this is very important for everyone to understand how largely this has impacted, not only me, not only all of the other Americans, and also specifically HBCU graduates and just African- American students in general.

Like I said, the racial wealth gap is pretty big. So given this opportunity, we're able to continue to build generational wealth and set the tone and create our legacy and continue to push forward. So I thank you for the opportunity and cancel student debt, please.

SCIUTTO: Thank you, Desiree. We appreciate having you on.

VENEY: Thank you. No problem. Thank you.

HILL: Joining us now CNN legal analyst, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Elliot Williams. Elliot, always great to have you with us.

So as we wait and we are sort of in a holding pattern here, as Jessica was pointing out, standing is key in these two cases, basically, whether they can demonstrate the harm that gives them the opportunity to bring these cases.

[10:10:02]

I'm guessing that if these plaintiffs don't prevail here, they're going to regroup. So this is not -- this opposition, and these legal challenges are not going to go away.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Oh, I don't think so, Erica. And look, standings, what you call a threshold issue, you've got to have what's called standing, meaning, you've got to be the party who was harmed by the thing, if you wish to get into court, that's how every lawsuit works.

And here, you have two different sets of parties, you got a few states, and you've got two borrowers. And both of them sort of have complicated standing arguments, the borrowers in particular, because even if they win, these are two folks who borrowed money, right, and did not get their loans forgiven.

Even if they win, they're not going to be benefited because the program will be done away with, right? They can't ever recover money. So it's just standing is a really tricky thing here in this case. And if they don't win on it, they may come back down the road.

SCIUTTO: All right. The other big issue here, right, is the extent of executive power. Now --

Williams: Yes.

SCIUTTO: -- help me understand here. Because I remember during the Trump administration, the court had a fairly expansive view of Trump executive power, for instance, regarding security at the border, the ability to deploy federal troops there.

In the Biden administration, you've seen them push back against executive decisions, for instance, on the EPA's authority to regulate emissions. And now this challenge here. Is there -- is there a consistent view of executive power there? Or might the court be accused of partisanship?

WILLIAMS: You know, I want to call back to Steve Vladeck, our colleague, his interview with you in the last hour in the saying that it's an increasing thing in which states of other parties are increasingly challenging the federal government over actions that they don't agree with. And that's really not different here. You have red states ultimately challenging the question here.

Look, the law -- and Jessica Schneider talked about this at the beginning of the segment, the law is quite clear on the matter which from the Heroes Act, which is that if there is a, quote, national emergency, which was declared on March 13th, 2020 by former President Trump, then the secretary of education can take steps and actions there. So really what this comes down to is, did they go too far? Did the Biden administration go too far? Based on that statute, the language is very clear. So the court is going to have to be creative if they wish to strike down the action here. The Biden administration took.

HILL: I know we're out of time, but really quickly. The fact that the Biden administration has said that national emergency is ending May 11th, I believe it is, does that have an impact here?

WILLIAMS: I think it may complicate things because, look, no matter what happens here, someone's going to refile a suit after this. The party -- whether it's the Biden administration, or whether it's the borrower's. And, yes, the posture changes once the national emergency isn't declared anymore.

SCIUTTO: All right. Another reason to watch the court closely. Elliot Williams, thanks so much.

WILLIAMS: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Still to come, the new House Select Committee on China is holding its first hearing today as the U.S. warns China against supplying weapons to Russia and also fears of China's designs on Taiwan. We're going to discuss.

HILL: Plus, happening now, the prosecution in the Alex Murdaugh trial, calling more witnesses before jurors actually make their way to the murder scene. We're going to take you live to South Carolina for the very latest.

SCIUTTO: And this, the Fox Chairman, Rupert Murdoch, has acknowledged that some of the hosts -- some of the biggest on Fox News, endorsed false claims the 2020 election was stolen. What's the significance of that admission? We'll have more on that, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:15:44]

SCIUTTO: Tonight, the House Select Committee on China will hold its first hearing on the overall threat China poses to the U.S. It comes at a time when tensions are high between the two nations over a myriad of issues, Taiwan, the war in Ukraine. Also concerns over the use of the Chinese social media platform TikTok.

I'm joined now by Democratic Representative, Jake Auchincloss. He's a member of that committee. Congressman, good morning. Thanks for joining.

REP. JAKE AUCHINCLOSS (D-MA): Good to be with you.

SCIUTTO: This is a bipartisan committees -- committee, Democrats and Republicans. I wonder in the work you're doing, again, this the first time you're having a hearing. Are Republicans and Democrats relatively united on challenging China? AUCHINCLOSS: Early indications are, yes, this committee represents a generational opportunity to rise above day in day out politics and chart a course for sound strategy. This strategy is predicated on values. The Chinese Communist Party does not recognize the inherent value of individuals. They think people are pawns of the states, whereas the United States was founded on self-evident truths. We believe in the inherent dignity and value of every human being. And we need to defend and help promote those human and civil rights not just here at home, but overseas as well.

SCIUTTO: Taiwan, of course, at the center of concerns in the relationship. You just returned from a trip to Taiwan. The CIA director said this weekend that China has told its military to be prepared, at least, having made a decision and be prepared to invade Taiwan by 2027.

When you speak to Taiwanese leaders, do they share that view that an invasion could be imminent?

AUCHINCLOSS: They certainly take seriously the threat of an amphibious invasion and they want foreign military sales, particularly from the United States, to help them prepare and deter that invasion, then they want officer to officer, professional military education and training.

I do think though that the more viable near-term threats from the mainland would be a one-two punch of energy, asphyxiation, plus disinformation. What I mean by that is that Taiwan only has two to three weeks of energy reserves on the island. The Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy could blockade their ports, prevent them from importing LNG and simultaneously pump disinformation onto the island about who's to blame and try to engineer really a coup from the outside in. That, to me is a significant threat that we need to help the Taiwanese prepare for.

[10:20:13]

SCIUTTO: As you know, President Biden has indicated at times that the U.S. would come to Taiwan's defense if China were to take the decision to invade militarily. That's been walked back to some degree by some of his advisers. Do you know what the U.S. policy is if China were to invade. Would U.S. send forces to defend Taiwan?

AUCHINCLOSS: The President of the United States gets to speak to U.S. foreign policy and national security decisions. We have one voice overseas. What I will say is that we need to be working with our Taiwanese partners to equip their military to ensure that they have energy independence and to help them counter Chinese disinformation and influence campaigns, which are pervasive and malicious. All of these things will change the cost benefit analysis for Xi Jinping as he considers whether or not to try to force reunification.

SCIUTTO: Other cost benefit analysis underway right now is on China's decision whether or not to supply weapons to Ukraine. U.S. intelligence says that they are considering this. You've heard U.S. officials talk about penalties to China primarily economic penalties. What should those penalties be exactly if China were to join the war in effect by arming Russian forces there?

AUCHINCLOSS: That needs to be determined with consultations between Congress Treasury state and the White House, but there does need to be accountability. The Chinese would be aiding and abetting war crimes where they descend weapons to Russia. And they would be more deeply exacerbating the rift that is already exists between democracies and this new axis of China, Russia, and Iran. So China needs to put itself on the right side of history with this war on Ukraine.

SCIUTTO: China lab leak, as you know, the Department of Energy shifted its assessment as to whether it leaks from -- COVID-19 leak from a lab. It's a low confidence assessment, but they have shifted it in that direction. What's happening here? And is -- if it is established that it is China, what should the U.S. do in effect in response to that?

AUCHINCLOSS: The intelligence community is divided about the origins of COVID. And there's healthy disagreement and debate within them. I think regardless, though, of the precise origin, here's what we do know. We know that early on, the Chinese Communist Party refused to share timely and salient information about the origins and spread of the virus when that information could have helped other nations prepare their own bio defenses.

And then later on when the Chinese were facing waves of COVID after unleashing or lifting up their Zero COVID policy, they also failed to upload new variants to the international genetic database. They have been less compliant with basic World Health Organization norms than even Russia or Iran. They have been a bad actor in terms of global public health. And it's really an unacceptable situation for a nation of 1.4 billion people.

SCIUTTO: Final question, TikTok, this is an issue that your committee is going to be dealing with. There's talk of banning it from just federal devices but other agencies, et cetera. For folks at home, who either have it on their phones themselves or their kids use it, God knows there are millions of Americans who do so, would you recommend them to delete that app because it being a threat to their privacy, to their personal information, a security threat?

AUCHINCLOSS: I've got two little kids at home, and my view on TikTok and every other social media platform, is that there should be an enforceable and verifiable age limit, at least of 16 years old. Because what TikTok and, frankly, other social media platforms are doing, is they are monetizing children's attention spans with no regard to their socio emotional or cognitive development.

They are really abusing the access that they have to young children's time. And open season is over and Congress needs to hold them all to account, TikTok included.

SCIUTTO: But it -- but it sounds like you're just grouping it with the general threat from other social media apps that it's a time suck in effect, but is it a national security issue is my question. Is it a personal security issue? AUCHINCLOSS: Well, I don't have TikTok on my phone. I think there's strong evidence that TikTok is working with the CCP and sharing that data. But I'm actually more concerned about the effects that all social media platforms have on children's well-being. It's not just a time suck. It's actually affecting their mental health and their cognitive development.

SCIUTTO: A lot of data, we've covered that on this show as well.

Well, Congressman Jake Auchincloss, thanks so much for joining us this morning.

AUCHINCLOSS: Thank you, Jim.

HILL: Just ahead here, prosecutors in the Alex Murdaugh murder trial calling more witnesses today before the jury will then visit the scene of the crime, the spot where Murdaugh's wife and son were killed. We're live in South Carolina.

[10:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: The final witnesses of the Alex Murdaugh murder trial are testifying now in South Carolina. The defense rested its case yesterday. Now, the prosecution is calling a number of rebuttal witnesses.

HILL: We're learning there will be seven of them. Among them are from a law partner who just left the stand. Once the prosecution does rest, that's when the jury will visit the site of the murder stand.

Dianne Gallagher is outside at the courthouse for us. Big day in this trial, Dianne. And the jury is going to be there for a little bit longer now that we know there were seven witnesses

[10:30:00]