Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Netanyahu's Office: Israel Recalls Its Negotiators From Qatar After Reaching A "Dead End" In Talks; Israeli Combat Ops Resume In Southern Gaza; Israel Defense Forces: 400+ Targets Struck In 24 Hours Since Truce Expired; National Defense Leaders Meet As United States Aid To Ukraine Remains In Limbo; House Could Take Action On Impeachment Inquiry Next Week; Federal Judge: Trump Does Not Have Absolute Immunity; Officials: Killer Targeting Homeless In Los Angeles; U.S. Mourns Death Of Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired December 02, 2023 - 12:00   ET

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

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: That's all we have time for now. I'll have more of your questions and my answers next week.

[12:00:01]

Now, if you want to ask me a question, scan the Q.R. code on your screen, or e-mail Askamanpour@cnn.com. And remember to tell us your name, and where you're from.

And don't forget, you can find all our shows online as podcasts at cnn.com/podcast and on all other major platforms.

I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. Thanks for watching, and I'll see you again next week.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, everyone. And thanks so much for joining me. I'm Jessica Dean, in for Fredricka Whitfield today.

The Israeli Defense Forces fire news strikes at Gaza, as fighting resumes following a week-long truce between Israel and Hamas.

The IDF is saying it carried out more than 400 strikes on Gaza in the first 24 hours since the seven-day truce expired Friday. And those strikes include targets in southern Gaza. It's an area that had remained largely unscathed during Israel's initial assault compared to the bombardment of Northern Gaza.

Talks of a new truce have reached "a dead end" according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 's office. Israel just recalled its team of negotiators from Qatar, blaming Hamas for the breakdown in those talks and accusing the terror group of not fulfilling its promise to return all women and children who are being held as hostages.

The IDF says there are still 136 hostages in Gaza, including 17 women and children. 110 hostages were released during the week-long truce. For more now let's turn to our CNN team who's on the ground. They're in Israel. Ben Wedeman is in Jerusalem, Oren Liebermann in Tel Aviv.

Oren, let's start first with you. Tell us the latest on these negotiations to bring the remaining hostage's home. Is anything being discussed at this point? And if so, what?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: The negotiations have all but collapsed at this point as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the Mossad to pullback its negotiations team, which was in Qatar, which was the focus of the negotiations over the course of the past weeks that got us to a truce that lasted seven days. That then collapsed as we saw early yesterday morning.

The issue is where does this go from here? The challenge, according to a source familiar with the negotiations is over what exactly the terms of the agreement are and are there numbers left to continue what we've seen, which was for the release of women and children, Israel and the U.S., according to the source familiar with the negotiations, believe Hamas was still holding enough women to be able to continue the release of women and children under the current agreement.

Hamas, however, insists it does not trying to push the negotiations into the next phase, which was supposed to be elderly men as well as soldiers, men and women. That is the point upon the upon which this fell apart.

Israel we're looking to stick to the current agreement, which was for the release of women and children believing Hamas held enough to continue under the agreement, which was the release of 10 women and children for another 24 hours in the pause. Hamas insisting it was Israel in the US to blame for the for the breakdown in the talks.

Meanwhile, Vice President Kamala Harris, who is in the Middle East as part of a climate conference, spoke with both the emir of Qatar and a leader of the United Arab Emirates. Efforts to restart the negotiations. But Jessica, unclear if those will gain any traction, especially as we see fighting ramp up.

DEAN: Right. And you mentioned that the fighting has ramped up it really appears that the IDF has jumped right back in with their attacks on Gaza since this truce expired. What is the latest on the fighting?

LIEBERMANN: Israel and Hamas both said they were ready for fighting to resume and that's absolutely what we have seen.

Israel, in the first 24 hours of fighting says the IDF struck more than 400 targets, which it calls terror sites as it continues going after Hamas. And those targets coming from rather those strikes, coming from the air, sea, and land, as Israel hits targets across Gaza, the north and the south there.

Meanwhile, we have seen a number of rocket launches, including most around the Gaza area, but some have reached Tel Aviv. I should point out that in the strikes on Gaza. In the Jabalia refugee camp in northern Gaza, there are concerns over dozens' dead in an apparent strike there in a multi-story apartment building.

The IDF had told people in that area to evacuate because it was an active war zone.

DEAN: All right. Oren, standby for us. Let's go now to Ben Wedeman in Jerusalem.

And Ben, there is more suffering in Gaza that's happening, because the strikes have picked up for the civilians there today, and apparent strike in northern Gaza's Jabalia refugee camp, likely killing dozens there.

What more are you learning about that strike?

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it has been another very bloody day in Gaza.

Now, just to pick up on where Oren left off this morning, the Arabic spokesman for the Israeli military put out a tweet, if we can still call it that. Telling the residents of Shejaiya, Tuffah, and Jabalia.

[12:04:55]

Those are neighborhoods to the east, northeast, and north of Gaza City, to leave immediately and to go to Salah al-Din Street, which is the main north-south Street in Gaza, because they would soon be in danger.

But -- and to do it by 1600, 4:00 p.m. local time, but at 2:00 in the afternoon, there was an Israeli strike on a six-story building in the Jabalia refugee camp. This was a building where, according to eyewitnesses and people in the area, more than 100 people were living them -- there, most of them displaced people, who had, had to flee their homes and other areas.

Now, we don't have a precise death toll at this point. But medical sources are talking about dozens' dead, dozens of women and children.

Now, later in the afternoon, there was another strike on a residential area in the Shejaiya area, which is east of Gaza City, where according to our information, 50 residential buildings -- apartment buildings were destroyed.

Yet again, dozens of people being killed in that instance. And I can tell you, I have spent the last few hours looking at video our cameramen have shot in hospitals, and the vast majority of the dead and wounded are children. Jessica?

DEAN: And Ben, what about humanitarian aid? That was part of the truce agreement. Now, that that's expired. What is the status of the aid that is or isn't getting into Gaza?

WEDEMAN: Jessica, we understand that, so far, the -- according to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, 55 trucks carrying food and medical aid have entered Gaza. Now, that's not very much when you consider that during the seven days of the truce, on average, 200 trucks were entering Gaza.

And prior to this war, it was 500 trucks entering Gaza every single day. So, 55 certainly is better than nothing. But it's far less than what's desperately needed in the Gaza Strip.

Jessica?

DEAN: All right. Ben Wedeman for us on the ground in Jerusalem; Oren Lieberman in Tel Aviv for us. Thanks to you both for that reporting.

Let's talk more about this with CNN military analyst, retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, former commanding general of Europe and the Seventh Army.

Thanks so much for being here with us. We just heard from Oren and Ben there about how the fighting has picked up, seemingly where it left off Israel resuming those strikes on Gaza.

Where do you see things moving in the next few days now that this truce has expired?

LT. GEN. MARK HERTLING (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: What I'd say just to counter what you just said, I think it actually has increased beyond where it was when it -- when it -- when we went into the pause.

Israel has conducted a lot of intelligence gathering during the period of the seven-day paws. They have not only received information from released hostages, but they've also received information from captured Hamas members, which gives them the ability to target very quickly and allegedly from the Israeli Defense Force that is more accurate.

What you're also seeing Israel is taking some advice from the Biden administration in terms of limiting their strikes to certain areas in town. As Ben just said, they are looking at the East northeast and northern part of the Jabalia and Gaza City.

They will expand that into other areas, most likely in Darabala (PH), which is the city in the center of Gaza, and even further to the south and Khan Younis units. Israel knows that there are multiple tunnel complexes and subterranean maneuvers going on by Hamas. And they're attempting to strike those vehemently with time sensitive targeting, and a whole lot of munitions from not only aircraft but from mortars and artillery pieces.

The fight is going to continue. And there is going to be increasing humanitarian -- just humanitarian trauma going on within the Gaza Strip.

And you mentioned how the IDF is expanding its operations is into southern Gaza, and that's where 1000s of the Gazan civilians have fled after what happened in the north.

We know that Secretary of State Tony Blinken said yesterday that he underscored the imperative of the United States that the massive loss of civilian life and displacement of the scale we saw in northern Gaza will not be repeated in the South. That, that is what he said he told the Israeli government. In your opinion, with him saying, with Blinken saying that publicly what do you think the IDF does with that information that warning or wish from the United States?

HERTLING: Yes, well, you know, as well as the Gazans fleeing south based on the direction, during the seven-day pause there was an advantage given to Hamas, because they also maneuvered to the south.

[12:10:09]

Probably took some of their hostages with them. And like I said a minute ago, the intelligence collection by Israel has probably tracked many of those Hamas fighters moving to the south, because they know that's where the Gazan citizens are.

And they want you to continue using those Palestinians that are in Gaza, as the human shields. That has not changed.

And Hamas has no respect for human life, they will continue to put those citizens up as human shields and attempt to draw the ire of the world community as Israel conducts their operation.

But I think what you'll see, some of the warnings that the Biden administration has given the Israeli Defense Forces and the Israeli government is make sure your targeting is precise. And it's not hitting randomly throughout an area.

Again, going back to what Ben said, there are three major areas in the north that are being hit. And I think that what Israel has proclaimed they're going to do is announce where they are going to strike and try and get civilians, the Palestinians out of those areas as rapidly as quickly as they can.

But at the same time, there are things that are called time sensitive targets, Jessica, where Israel has an intelligence and -- on some kind of terrorist leader or terrorist cell, and they will strike that in consideration of unfortunately, what it will do in turn your terms of collateral damage to Palestinian citizens.

An extremely complex Battlefield, one that I certainly wouldn't want to be fighting on, because it is that hard.

DEAN: And you mentioned about how Hamas has continued to show that it will use human shields moving to the south, as you're saying where it knows a lot of those civilians are.

I want to ask you one more question before we let you go, just about the sway that the United States government will or won't have with Israel and the choices that it will make militarily? How, how much do you think that will weigh with Israel? And how much should it weigh with them?

HERTLING: Yes, it is a tough question, Jessica. And that's the key to all of this, because Israel has their strategic objective of defeating and destroying Hamas. Hamas has their strategic objective of killing Jews, and embarrassing Israel. The United States has their strategic objective of trying to remain friends with Israel during these very difficult situations. But at the same time, avoiding a huge humanitarian disaster, and the killing of innocent civilians.

And unfortunately, those three strategic objectives are in conflict with one another in terms of a war fight like this on the edge of Israel.

So, I believe the Israeli government, Mr. Netanyahu has taken some of the advice from the Biden administration. But at the same time, he has a strategic objective of destroying Hamas. And that is not going to bend his will and the Israelis will all that much. And we've seen that even as, as the pause was getting ready to end, Hamas went back up and started firing rockets, as Oren just reported, back at Tel Aviv. The longest range rockets the Hamas has.

So, all of those things are considerations of how do you stop this terrorist organization from killing Israelis, and at the same time, avoiding the killing of Palestinian -- Palestinians? It's very challenging to do for any military force.

DEAN: Right. All right, Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, thanks so much for your expertise there. We really appreciate it.

HERTLING: Thank you, Jessica.

DEAN: A key national defense forum is happening right now in Simi Valley, California. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs Chairman C.Q. Brown, both there.

Israel's war with Hamas isn't officially named as part of the agenda. But of course, it is sure to be a hot topic of discussion. CNN's chief national security analyst Jim Sciutto is there as a moderator for this event. And Jim is Joining us now.

Jim, with additional U.S. aid for Israel now in limbo in Congress, what are you hearing there were so many of these people that have a seat at the table are gathering?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF UNITED STATES SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, a question you -- not only do you have senior military officials, Austin Brown, you also have Democratic and Republican lawmakers here, leaders on the key committees. And here, there is unity that the U.S. needs to amped-up a -- not just to Israel, but also to Ukraine. And as you know, those aid packages are tied to each other.

In fact, they note frequently, I was just listening to Senator Joni Ernst, of course, Republican from Iowa, and Adam Smith, Democrat congressman -- both of them saying that large majorities in their own parties support boosting aid to both Israel and Ukraine. And what they find is that it's a small minority, particularly in the House among Republicans, which we're very familiar with, we've talked about many times, the same group that brought down McCarthy that are standing in the way. [12:15:01]

There is enormous effort right now on the Hill to get that aid package through, and quickly, because of the need not just in Gaza but also in Ukraine.

There is some optimism that I'm hearing here, and I've heard in Washington as well that they will be able to get it through. But it's not there yet. And there's a great deal of urgency because, of course, the war is raging in Gaza, military operations resuming, but also, we can't forget, the war is still rate waging very much -- raging very much in Ukraine.

DEAN: Right. I mean, that's the thing, right? It's there -- is the Israeli there is also the Ukraine, aid, Jim is, as you mentioned, and all of it kind of wrapped up together. There is been talk about, do you separate them? That's not what the White House want. That's not what, you know, Senate leaders want on either side.

What are you hearing from the people you're talking to about putting any sort of, you know, putting strings attached to any of this aid, or the possibility that they would be separated. That maybe Israel aid would move, but not Ukraine?

It looks right -- the plan right now is to do them all together. And added into that mix is border security, that there seems to be an awareness now and acceptance, even among Democrats, that to get Israel aid and Ukraine aid, there have to be concessions on border security, raising the standard for asylum seekers, other changes in terms of asylum laws to get this across the finish line.

I mean, those things are not typically connected. Foreign military assistance to a domestic national security issue, but they are in this case, and it seems that Democrats, even the Biden administration are increasingly aware, they are going to have to be concessions on border issues. So, which if you speak to border state Democrats, there is support for as well, those changes.

But then, there is just the urgency of the wars, particularly with Ukraine. I had a story yesterday, discussing the latest western intelligence assessments that it's going to be a very tough winter for Ukraine that Russia is going to amped-up attacks on civilian infrastructure, expressly to increase the pain on the civilian population. Trying to break their will. So, there's urgency to get that military assistance through and quickly.

They are not there yet. I am hearing some optimism here, Jessica. But as you know, you followed the hill a long time, optimism doesn't necessarily mean a final answer. So, there is still -- there is still work to do. DEAN: There is always more work to do. All right, Jim Sciutto, for us out in California.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

DEAN: Thanks so much. We appreciate it. And still to come, in a historic vote the House expelled Congressman George Santos over ethics violations. What's next for that seat and how his constituents are reacting? We're going to be live in Queens, New York. That's next.

And also later, a federal appeals Court paving the way for former President Donald Trump to be sued over January 6th. We'll have more details on that, just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:22:12]

DEAN: The House Speaker Mike Johnson says she believes Republicans have the votes to launch a formal impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden. CNN White House correspondent Arlette Saenz, joining us now.

Arlette, what did the Speaker say this morning?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: We'll Jessica, Speaker Mike Johnson said that he believes that the Republicans will have the votes to launch a formal impeachment inquiry into President Biden, which would be a significant move.

Of course, we would have to wait and see if those votes actually would be there as they are moving towards potentially holding a vote in the coming weeks.

Now, this comes after GOP leadership and top committee members made the pitch behind closed doors to their Republican Conference, making the case for why they believe an inquiry is necessary in this moment.

They've accused the White House of obstructing and stonewalling their efforts. That's something, of course, that the White House has pushed back on. But take a listen to what Johnson had to say earlier this morning. Saying that he believes the votes will be there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): A formal Impeachment Inquiry vote on the floor will allow us to take it to the next necessary step. And I think it's something we have to do at this juncture.

PETE HEGSETH, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST: Do you have the votes to actually formally start an impeachment process?

JOHNSON: Yes, I believe we will. I suspect no Democrats will assist in this effort. But they should. The facts are so clear for everyone to see.

And the Constitution requires the House to follow the truth where it leads. We have a duty to do this. We cannot stop the process.

SAENZ: Now, the White House has repeatedly pushed back on the suggestions that an impeachment inquiry should be launched into President Biden. They have pointed to the fact that so far, these investigations have not turned up any evidence of wrongdoing against President Biden.

They have described it even this morning with a spokesperson on Twitter calling it a baselessly and shamelessly politically motivated stunt.

Now, the White House also yesterday was trying to go on offense before this gathering of those Republicans to talk about the ways -- the steps forward on an impeachment inquiry, the White House outlining that they have had sit down interviews and transcriptions with various officials, including within the DOJ, that there have been documents provided to the investigators as they have been trying to look into these matters.

But all eyes will be on this coming week if, in fact, the House decides to vote on an impeachment inquiry and determining whether or not there is the actual votes to make that process formal and official.

DEAN: Yes, absolutely.

Arlette Saenz for us at the White House. Thanks for that update. And House Republicans very slim majority now even tighter after Congress voted to expel New York Congressman George Santos. The Republican majority in the House now down to a razor thin three seats.

A scathing House Ethics report laid out a litany of wrongdoings by the twice indicted former GOP congressman. And now, New York Governor Kathy Hochul is prepared to fill the vacancy following his ouster.

Santos spoke to reporters as he left the House floor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[12:25:02]

GEORGE SANTOS, FORMER REPRESENTATIVE OF NEW YORK: I had no skin in the game.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you -- do you know this is how it was going to go?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- sir.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you know -- did you know this is how it was going to go?

SANTOS: You know what? Unofficially already, I'm no longer a member of Congress. I no longer have to answer a single question from you guys.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: Didn't always answer our questions anyway, just for the record. Joining me now is Polo Sandoval. You are in Queens, which is George Santos' district. What's next for his seat? POLO SANDOVAL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, first off, Jessica, you can see, the former congressman's name still on his office. That is obviously going to change here very soon.

Now, in terms of the process that's in place to allow the people in New York's 3rd congressional district to turn the page on what's been a very complicated chapter to say the least.

The process itself, though, it's really quite simple. You see, Governor Kathy Hochul now has 10 days to announce a special election. That's supposed to take place 70 or 80 days after that announcement is made.

And unlike your typical election, it would not be a primary that would decide those candidates, it will be party leaders at the county level that would then bring forth a list of candidates that would eventually end up on the ballot.

Already, the pool is quite significant. Everything from a retired police detective, a war veteran, to even the man who used to fill George Santos position before he left in pursuit of an unsuccessful bid at the governorship.

And eventually, that's when constituents would elect the next person that would represent this critical district. You just mentioned, that slim margin Santos would have four Republicans that flipped districts that were traditionally blue.

So, Republicans certainly have a lot riding on this. So, this is a process. It's just beginning -- really just started yesterday, Jessica, in terms of what the residents are saying. We've heard them time and time again, expressing frustration, expressing anger this morning, I had an opportunity to speak to a couple of residents here, as to what are they looking for in their next representative?

A few words that stand out: transparency, competency, professionalism, but above all, Jessica, honesty. And that is certainly quite telling of what the mood is here in former Congressman George Santos's district.

DEAN: Yes. looking for honesty. All right. Polo Sandoval for us in Queens. Thanks so much.

Coming up, a serious legal blow to former President Donald Trump. A federal appeals court ruling the former president can be sued over January 6th. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:31:40]

DEAN: A federal appeals court ruling former President Donald Trump can indeed be sued in civil lawsuits related to the January 6th Capitol riot. On Friday, the court rejecting his claim that he has presidential immunity in those cases. The opinion reading in part when the President quote, acts outside of the functions of his office, he does not continue to enjoy immunity, when he acts in an unofficial private capacity, he is subject to civil suits like any private citizen.

CNN's Marshall Cohen is joining us now. And Marshall, later Friday, a federal judge in Trump's election subversion criminal case, also rejected his immunity claims. He's made a lot of these claims in various cases that he has throughout the country. What did that judge say?

MARSHALL COHEN, CNN REPORTER: Yes, Jessica, two very consequential rulings yesterday, you broke down the civil case, I'll break down the criminal case. This is the case filed here in D.C. by Special Counsel Jack Smith. The trial, remember, is scheduled for March. But before we get to that point, Donald Trump is trying everything in the book, everything he can do to get the charges dismissed and thrown out.

So what he was arguing here was that he enjoyed absolute immunity. He argued that everything in the indictment covered actions that he took while he was the sitting President of the United States, and therefore, he can't be charged with any crimes. The only problem there is that the judge completely disagreed.

She resoundingly rejected that argument. She said, it's not supported by the text of the Constitution. It's not backed up by any Supreme Court precedents. And she also said that wasn't the intention of the founding fathers. This 50-page ruling, Jessica, got into the Federalist Papers, and Alexander Hamilton and George Washington's farewell address, where they tried to make it clear that they did not want the president to be like a king, they did not want the president to be above the law.

Let me read for you a quote from Judge Tanya Chutkan who wrote this opinion. Here's what she said, quote, whatever immunities a sitting president may enjoy, the United States has only one chief executive at a time. And that position does not confer a lifelong get-out-of-jail- free pass. Strong words there from the judge.

But it won't be the final word. This is almost certainly going to be appealed by President Trump. Maybe go all the way to the Supreme Court. So they will definitely have an opportunity to weigh in. The trial, Jessica, is scheduled for March, and if no one intervenes between now and then and grants trump any immunity or drops any of the charges then it'll be time for his first criminal trial. Jessica?

DEAN: March of 2024 and election year in which he is running for president again. It is quite a story to follow Marshall Cohen, thanks so much for that update.

And let's discuss this further with former federal prosecutor Michael Zeldin, who was a special assistant at the Department of Justice to Robert Moeller and is the host of the podcast, "That Said with Michael Zeldin." Michael, thanks so much for being here.

The Federal Appeals opinion that Trump could be sued in the civil cases is being heralded as a consequential decision. How big of a blow though are both of these to Trump's defense? MICHAEL ZELDIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, there are two different cases, one civil for damages, one criminal for liability and freedom. And both of them though reject the notion that a president can be immune from civil lawsuit or criminal prosecution as Trump has asked the courts to do. So the one-two of this, that which unifies the two decisions is this question of, can a former president be held accountable for his acts while in office?

[12:35:31]

And each court said, what he did was not part of his official duties, and therefore confers no immunity from prosecution or civil liability. So it's a rejection of his fundamental argument that he is immune from anything lawsuit, civil, criminal prosecution. And we'll hear from appellate courts on the criminal stuff on the civil side, I think it's pretty well settled that his argument had no precedent that supports it.

DEAN: And we heard from Marshall just there from Judge Chutkan in the federal case, and that she wrote that the job of president quote, does not confer a lifelong, get-out-of-jail-free-pass, which is pretty clear. She's very clear in those words. What do you make of her ruling there and what she wrote?

ZELDIN: Well, that's exactly right, remember, going back, Jessica, to the Mueller investigation. One of the reasons that Mueller said he couldn't bring charges against Trump was because he was a sitting president. And the Office of Legal Counsel said, you can't bring charges against the civil -- sitting president, because it would be too disruptive to the government.

But of course, once he leaves office, it was fair game. Chutkan, following on that said, well, he's now left office. He's now fair game, Mitch McConnell, in his speech, at the time of the impeachment said the same thing. And so it's pretty classic, that when you are private citizen, Trump, then you are liable for the criminal acts that you undertake, whether you're taking them now or whether you undertook them when you were president.

And it seems pretty straightforward. But of course, the Court of Appeals will have to rule on this and then perhaps there'll be a petition to the Supreme Court for them to hear it depending on the outcome at the appellate level.

DEAN: And what do you expect from President Trump and his legal team now?

ZELDIN: Well, an immediate appeal. I think they're going to appeal both of these things. Their position is very sort of radical in the sense that they say, everything a president does, whether it's civil or criminal is immune period, full stop, and he cannot be charged with anything ever. That just does not comport with the tradition of our Constitution.

As Marshall said, the framers of the Constitution said exactly otherwise. But they're going to pursue this. And of course, what is at the bottom of all of this, besides the desire to win is the desire to delay. And so the Chutkan trial cannot go forward, while this immunity question is still lingering. And so if the Court of Appeals takes its sweet time in deciding it, and if they filed a motion for Sir Shiori (ph), for the Supreme Court to hear it, and they take their sweet time, and that March date may be just aspirational and not actual.

DEAN: And she's really been trying to keep this on track and moving forward to get it through that her courtroom and through the federal system there. What if any impact do these rulings have on some of the other cases that are out there against the former president?

ZELDIN: Well, it's a great question. And it relates exactly to the types of questions that are being litigated in the courts of Georgia, because those same questions of whether the President is immune from state prosecution apply there. And so his lawyers in Georgia just yesterday, I think we're arguing the same thing that the President is immune from criminal prosecution for his acts while undertaken as president.

And therefore this RICO Georgia case should fail too. I don't know that the judge will accept that. There's no precedent for it. But again, it's the same argument all across the board that the President keeps making, the former president keeps making that he has absolute immunity. Everything he did no matter when he did it, free and clear, get-out-of-jail-free pass.

DEAN: I was going to say it sounds like that get-out-of-jail-free pass that she was mentioning. All right, Michael Zeldin, thanks so much. We appreciate it. Always nice to have you.

ZELDIN: Thanks for having me.

[12:39:50]

DEAN: Coming up next, police in Los Angeles are looking for a killer believed to be targeting homeless people. We're going to tell you what we know about that when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: Los Angeles officials say a killer is on the loose and is targeting the city's homeless after three people were shot and killed earlier this week. Now the city's mayor is warning residents to be vigilant and to stick together.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR KAREN BASS (D), LOS ANGELES: This is a killer who is preying on the unhoused. Our message to the unhoused community is clear. Do not sleep alone tonight.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: CNN's Camila Bernal is joining us now from Los Angeles. Camila, what is the latest there? CAMILA BERNAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Jessica. So authorities believe this is one killer and acting in similar ways because what they say happened here was a person shot three unhoused people while they were alone. All three of them believed to have been killed while they were sleeping. All three of them believed to have been sleeping in an open area whether that be a sidewalk or an alley, and all in nearby areas here in Los Angeles.

[12:45:10]

The first incident happened on Sunday. That happened at around 3:00 in the morning. The next one happening on Monday at around 5:00 in the morning. And then the third happening Wednesday at around 2:30 in the morning. So authorities telling all of Los Angeles to be careful. And if you have family members to reach out to them if they are living on the streets, because they do not know whether this person could kill again.

They say this is simply someone who attacked the unhoused population who is walking up to them, shooting them, and then just walking away. They did -- authorities did release a photo of a man they believe is responsible for this. It is someone wearing a hoodie. So they released a couple of images to the public.

But right now they have not identified that person and are really asking for the public's help to try to nail this down. Now, this is of course, a city that houses one of the largest unhoused populations in the country. And it's part of the reason why Mayor Karen Bass is telling people to be vigilant not to sleep alone at night and to really take care of each other. What she was encouraging people to do was to seek help, to seek shelter so that they can avoid something like this happening to them.

She says this is extremely difficult for an area that deals with a lot of people who are unhoused. And so that's why she's saying this takes sort of a village to overcome. They have a created a task force that is currently trying to figure out who this person is and trying to gather evidence as quickly as possible so that they can identify a suspect.

And in general, they say they do not have a motive. They don't know why this person is doing this, but they are clear that this person is targeting the unhoused population. Jessica?

DEAN: All right, Camila Bernal for us in Los Angeles with that scary update, we appreciate it.

She was the first woman on the Supreme Court. Former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has died at the age of 93. We're going to have a look at her life and her legacy that's just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:51:37]

DEAN: Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor died Friday at the age of 93. She was the first woman to sit on the Supreme Court after being nominated by President Ronald Reagan in 1981. And during her time on the High Court, it was informally dubbed the O'Connor Court due to her decisive votes on a number of controversial cases.

And joining us now to talk about her legacy, the Vice Dean of the USC Law School, Franita Tolson. Thanks so much for being here with us. Talk us through what you think --

FRANITA TOLSON, VICE DEAN, USC LAW SCHOOL: Thank you.

DEAN: -- Sandra Day O'Connor's legacy is.

TOLSON: So first, let me get my condolences to Justice O'Connor's family and friends. I think that, you know, she was an inspiration to every woman who has heard the word, no. She integrated a space where women were not welcome. And while her legacy as a justice is somewhat complicated, I do think that her legacy still recognizes that she was a well-respected jurist, she had a brilliant legal mind. And she also opened the door for every brilliant woman to join the court after her. So we owe her a debt for everything that she did to bring women into that space.

DEAN: And we know that O'Connor's 1992 opinion in the Planned Parenthood versus Casey case, reaffirmed a woman's right to an abortion. She also wrote the five-four opinion upholding the University of Michigan law schools affirmative action program in 2003. We saw both of those decisions overturned by the court just in the last couple of years. Does that impact her legacy at all? Does it tarnish the impact that she had on the court in the sense that those kind of pivotal rulings were overturned?

TOLSON: I don't think it tarnishes her legacy per se, it may tarnish the legacy of the court overall. But I do think that those decisions reflect how crucial she was as a swing vote and how difficult it was to sort of cabin Justice O'Connor as justice that was to the right or the left. So for example, in Planned Parenthood versus Casey, which Justice O'Connor joined, she reaffirmed roles commitment to recognizing the right to terminate a pregnancy.

But at the same time, the decision limited. I'm sorry, the decision made it easier for states to regulate pregnancy at the very outset, right? So in some ways it recognized the right of -- to terminate a pregnancy but it also enlarged the power of the states. And I think that maybe the sign of a good justice is one that issues decisions that really please no one, right? Like, you know, she definitely has some decisions that were complicated.

Another space in which her legacy is probably more complicated is in the democracy space, right? She was the last person to serve on the Supreme Court who had been elected to public office. And I do think that informed her views on subjects such as gerrymandering, for example, where she treated it is one of the spoils of winning off. Its right, if a majority is able to come to office, the ability to gerrymander is something they have a right to do. And federal courts did not really have much to say about it. Yet at the same time, she cast one of the decisive votes in Bush versus Gore, which ended the 2000 Florida recount. And that decision went on to arguably politicize the court and involve them even more in political disputes from then on. So her legacy is definitely complicated. But I wouldn't say it's necessarily tarnished by what the current court is doing, even if it has the effect of undermining some of her earlier decisions.

DEAN: Undermining maybe the better optimal word there. Just before you go quickly, as the Vice Dean I know you're interacting with a lot of law students all the time. How do they study and look back and reflect and garner information from her time on the bench?

[12:55:15]

TOLSON: Well, interim dean now, so spending less time with law students. But I do think that, and I miss them very much, but I do think that when I taught subjects like constitutional law and election law, Justice O'Connor featured quite prominently in many of the cuts -- in many of the cases that we read and studied, in part because she was the quintessential swing justice.

You know, we talk about Chief Justice Roberts is kind of serving that role now, but I think Justice O'Connor paved the way. It was -- there are cases where, you know, she would join a majority. And then she would write a separate concurring opinion where she would lay out kind of what she thought that the majority opinion stood for, right? And it's not too many justices who are brave enough to do something like that.

So Justice O'Connor really does, at least in the law school context feature quite prominently as an example of what it can mean to be a Supreme Court justice, and in particular, an effective one.

DEAN: All right, Franita Tolson, we're going to leave it there. But thanks so much for your thoughts and reflections. We sure do appreciate it.

TOLSON: Thank you. Have a good day.

DEAN: You too.

And we have a quick programming note for you, you can follow the incredible story of how $24 million was stolen for the McDonald's monopoly game during the 1990s. It's a six part docu series, "McMillion$." It airs tonight at 8:00 on CNN. We're going to be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)