Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Key Senate Vote On Trump's Agenda Bill; Supreme Court Emboldens Trump, Limits Lower Courts' Power; Anti-War Protests In Israel Calling To End War In Gaza, Return Of Hostages; Crowds Attend State Funerals In Tehran; Newsom Sues Fox News, Alleging Defamation; Senate Holds Key Procedural Vote On Trump's Agenda Bill; CA Residents Fed Up With Beeping Driverless Robot Taxis. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired June 28, 2025 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:40]

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN HOST: Welcome to the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Omar Jimenez in New York. Jessica Dean has the day off.

Breaking this hour, senators are convening for a rare Saturday night session as they look to push through President Donald Trump's massive agenda bill. We're currently waiting on a key procedural vote, so that has to pass for senators to formally debate the bill on the floor.

I spoke with both Minnesota Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar and South Dakota Republican Senator Mike Rounds earlier tonight. They had differing reasons for why that vote has not happened yet.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): They seem to be having trouble because the vote was supposed to be at 4:00. We had 40 Democrats sitting out there on the floor waiting for them. And now we're still got a number of Democrats out there. I guess we like each other because they are nowhere to be found. So it makes me think that they maybe don't have the votes.

SEN. MIKE ROUNDS (R-SD): I think the most recent information that we have is that we have a commitment for the votes, but in order to get to that commitment, there are some amendments that some people want to make sure that they can offer. But anytime you make an amendment to a bill like this, you've got to know what the score is. And I think what's going on is, is they're trying to make sure that the scores on their amendments are appropriate and that they'll fit within the confines that the bill calls for.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: So we've got team coverage tonight. I want to start with CNN congressional correspondent Lauren Fox.

So, Lauren, where do things stand at the moment?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we are still waiting and it has been now more than three hours since we anticipated that this vote could begin. It's a key procedural vote and one that obviously leadership needs to be successful on in order to advance this bill.

Now, we are told from Republican senators who have been on and off the floor, including Mike Rounds, who you just played there, that part of this is waiting on the Congressional Budget Office, which is the official scorekeeper, to get them back some numbers that are important for people to make a decision about how they want to vote to proceed onto this bill.

Obviously, this is a live action demonstration, as one lawmaker put it to me, which means essentially that things are changing on the fly, and they just want to make sure that all their ducks are in a row before they go to the floor. Of course, once you have the votes, you vote. That is the old adage here in the Senate, but it just remains to be seen how much longer this might take.

Now, Rounds is still really optimistic they're going to vote this evening, but obviously every hour that slips by that just sort of forces the timeline even further into potentially late Sunday, early Monday morning. This is going to be a really drawn out process, and we have been highlighting this. But Democrats are going to force Republicans to read the bill once they get through this initial procedural vote.

If they're successful, that could take up to 15 hours. Then you have 10 to 12 hours of debate that we are expecting. That gets you to tomorrow evening. That is when they would begin this vote-a-rama, which is a marathon series where lawmakers can just introduce amendment after amendment, have vote after vote until both sides agree they're exhausted and they want to have a vote on the final bill.

But again, part of this is that lawmakers still have concerns about the contents of this bill. There might be things that they want to change, and leadership has to game out what that process is going to look like on the floor. The last thing you want is some amendment to come up in that vote-a-rama, change the contents of the bill, change your final vote tally that you've been really resting your laurels upon, and then you're in this situation where suddenly the president's agenda could fail on the floor.

So leadership certainly in the process right now of just making sure that they have the support that they need, that they know where this is going. You don't want any uncertainty on the floor once you begin this process.

JIMENEZ: And again, for the viewers, all of this vote that we're waiting on is just to start that process that Lauren Fox laid out. So we truly are just at the -- before the starting line, I guess we should say, at this point.

Annie -- thank you, Lauren Fox, really appreciate it.

Annie, let's talk about what's in this Senate bill, Annie Grayer, because is it different from what Republicans put out last night? Do we have final language? Do we know? ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Well, it is an ever-moving

target, Omar. We're trying to stay on top of it. But there were some last minute changes overnight that has had an impact on where senators stand on the bill.

[19:05:00]

So one of the overarching issues, this entire process has been how much to cut Medicaid. And we've seen Republicans like Senator Josh Hawley, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Thom Tillis all say that that is a huge issue for them. And two changes overnight have helped assuage at least some of the concerns. So one of them has to do with providing a rural hospital fund to help hospitals take the impact of the Medicaid cuts. And this is going to give them $25 billion over five years.

Now, Republicans had wanted more initially, closer to $100 billion, but $25 billion as these negotiations go is, you know, better than zero. And the second has to do with provider taxes. Another contentious issue. Senators were able to lower the tax there and delay when those taxes will go into effect.

Now a separate issue has to do with getting bigger tax breaks for state and local taxes. Now this is an issue that New York Republicans, specifically in the House, have been pushing really hard, and they have been working with the Treasury Department and Republican senators, and together, as this new version came out, they were able to get a bigger tax break than is currently in place now from $10,000 to $40,000.

So these are the nitty gritty details that are -- that leadership and the White House are trying to use to get as many lawmakers on board as possible. After this new version came out, Republican Senator Josh Hawley said he is now in favor of the bill. Again, Republicans can only lose three votes. Every vote counts here. Republicans have different reasons why they might be against this bill, but these are the sorts of changes that leadership is working through.

JIMENEZ: All right, Annie Grayer, I know you and Lauren will be on top of it. Really appreciate the reporting.

I want to turn now to the White House, where CNN's Betsy Klein is keeping a close eye on how President Trump is handling this latest test of his agenda in the Senate because obviously this would be a big deal for the president, and he has treated it as such, spent part of the day golfing at his Virginia club. But it also appears that he was playing politics, keeping up with what was going on.

Just what can you tell us here, Betsy?

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Omar, this is a make-or-break moment on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue. And President Trump is so keenly aware of some of the concerns about this bill because he has been fielding calls from Republican senators for the last 24 hours or so. This massive tax and spending package is really critical to unlocking

the president's domestic agenda going forward. So the White House believes that it is crucial that they get this over the finish line while Republicans have control over both the House and the Senate. So for all of those reasons, President Trump, along with Vice President JD Vance, have been working the phones, the president scrapping a planned trip to New Jersey this weekend, spending a rare weekend here in Washington, D.C., where, as you mentioned, he hit the golf course with a trio of key senators, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, as well as Eric Schmitt of Missouri, and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Now, notably, Paul has said he is a no vote on this bill. He has concerns about the debt ceiling provisions that are currently in it. And Senator Graham, at the end of that golf tournament, said that the big, beautiful bill is on the way, but it is unclear whether President Trump, who really fashions himself as a dealmaker, he wrote the "Art of the Deal," was he able to get that deal over the finish line with Rand Paul? We still don't know that.

But the reality is that there are many big policy divisions within the Republican Party on the size and scope and cost of this bill, as well as concerns about cuts to Medicaid. The president holding a massive event, pushing for this bill on Thursday, where he said that anyone who was considering voting no is a grandstander, not good people. But the White House has been pushing to get this done by the 4th of July. The president expressing some softening of that deadline. He said it's important, but not the end all.

And this is still far from over, Omar. Of course, if and once this passes the Senate, all those changes still have to be approved by the House before it can go to the president's desk.

JIMENEZ: Yes. That July 4th deadline, again, sounds like they're softening, but it looks less and less likely as we still wait for a procedural vote tonight.

So, look, we're still waiting to see what happens with that vote. But he is still celebrating a major win with the Supreme Court landmark ruling yesterday, which really significantly expanded presidential powers and limits lower courts from blocking executive orders.

What is the White House saying about it?

KLEIN: Yes, the White House really considers this a monumental decision. The president calling it a victory. It limits the power of the federal judiciary to block executive branch policies on a nationwide basis. So this case that was ruled upon was ostensibly about the issue of birthright citizenship. But the Supreme Court set that aside for the moment, weighing in instead on how the administration was barred from enforcing President Trump's executive action on that subject.

Now, lower courts have been a thorn in the side of presidents on both sides of the aisle, including issuing injunctions on things like President Biden's efforts to end student loan debt, as well as President Obama's signature health care bill. [19:10:10]

So this is not new. It was something that was frustrating to President Trump in the beginning of his term. President Trump -- the president and his predecessors, of course, believe that they were elected to issue these executive actions. The president now says he has a whole list of policies he can proceed with, including ending birthright citizenship, ending sanctuary city funding, ending taxpayer payment for transgender surgery, among other issues.

Of course, this decision will strengthen executive power for Trump, but also anyone who comes after him, Omar.

JIMENEZ: Betsy Klein, really appreciate the reporting.

I want to talk more about this. I'm going to bring in former U.S. attorney and former deputy assistant attorney general Harry Litman. He's now host of the "Talking Feds" podcast.

So, Harry, can you just first help us understand this ruling from the Supreme Court a little bit? I mean, how significant of a precedent have the justices set with this decision on presidential power? I mean, what does it mean for the legal case against President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship?

HARRY LITMAN, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Yes. So, Omar, it's going to be pretty significant in practical effect. Now cases will still come before the lower courts, and they'll say, as they said to in a series of these executive orders, it's unconstitutional. And this plaintiff gets relief. You cannot apply it. This plaintiff says I -- that birthright citizenship that his interpretation is wrong and if they agree that plaintiff stays a citizen.

But now after this ruling, Trump can go to the next district and the next, there are 93, and try his luck there. Whereas before lower courts have been saying repeatedly, this is unconstitutional, and I'm going to at least temporarily enjoin it while -- and that's for the whole country. It's that that the Supreme Court said lower courts can't do anymore. They can still find things unconstitutional and they can still give so-called complete relief to the plaintiffs before them.

But for everyone else in the country, they can't. And so when Trump is saying as he just reported, I'm going to really go to town, say, on birthright citizenship, what he means is if a court tells him it's unconstitutional, he'll just continue to go around and try it elsewhere, making a sort of patchwork pattern of different results.

JIMENEZ: So let's talk options here because we were just talking to Congressman Jamie Raskin, who told me if we've got to go win, excuse me. If we've got to go win in 94 district courts vindicating the constitutional right of birthright citizenship, we're going to do it. But also when you talk about the action here or the options here, it really just seems to be class action lawsuits with national implications. I mean, just -- can you talk me through what the strategies are now going to be? LITMAN: Yes. Again, so what we're talking about is all the people who

aren't in that one lawsuit, what do you do about them? First, as you say, you get squadrons of lawyers and we come even more litigious and they just bring the same suit in 94 different districts. But second, yes, federal rules permit you to have a class of people. It can be a very big class as long as they have common issues and they make other hurdles.

And a lot of people say, OK, not such a big problem, we'll just switch over into that mindset, bring a class action. And when courts give complete relief to a whole class, that's almost the same as a nationwide injunction. Of course, cost a lot of money. Some courts aren't too keen on them. Justice Alito, in particular, in this case, said, now, don't try to do this with class actions.

But if the class action regime can be strengthened to basically be what other cases have been, where there have been individual ones, then it turns out to not have such practical impact because when the court says, I give relief to everyone in front of me, it's that big a class that are in front of the court.

JIMENEZ: And, look, when you look at obviously the injunction dynamic prior to this ruling has been prevalent across the attempted implementation of many of Trump's executive orders, you look at some of the migrant orders, for example, obviously, we got a ruling that the Trump administration can now deport folks to third party countries. But on that front, if we want to just game it out in the class action lawsuit world, is it possible for some of the migrants seeking legal action in general to join a class action lawsuit?

I mean, could that put them at a higher risk for deportation if they're attaching their name to an attempt to push back on the Trump administration?

[19:15:00]

LITMAN: Boy, it sure shouldn't. And that would be an awfully vindictive thing to do. But we've seen that kind of tendency within the administration. But the short answer is no. Nothing stops them. In fact, sometimes you don't even know you're in a class. The lawyer says to the court, I want everyone who fits this description, and some people who are out there fit it. They become part of the class. So I really think you're going to see -- we've already seen it since yesterday.

Four or five cases have now been refiled as class actions, but there's going to be a question of whether courts will grant them. And there are some courts that are stricter than others. All in all, it's chaotic. It has the possibility of being, you know, a big mess. But you can see a way, you can see a state of play in the country where the impact of yesterday's ruling is minimized.

JIMENEZ: And then on the birthright citizenship case because the justices did leave intact the chance for broad relief through class action lawsuits on that front, how strong of a case do plaintiffs have using that legal avenue? Are there other legal pathways, for example? LITMAN: Yes. Let me just start with what's so important here. The

birthright citizenship position of the administration is really very, very few people think it holds water. It seems to contradict the text of the 14th Amendment. So -- but what could happen practically is you bring it to a court, the court right away says, get out of here. That's unconstitutional. And they say, oops. And then they go to another court and another court, and you may have some people who have been ruled -- who rule in their favors, children, that the administration goes to deport right away and tell it all works up to the Supreme Court. It really can be a total mess.

Now, what the court said is you can give relief only as necessary to give complete relief to a plaintiff. The arguments also you're going to be seeing is, I say, birthright citizenship is unconstitutional. But to give me complete relief, you've got to hold it across the board, because if Texas could do something different, that means my kid goes to Texas and things get complicated there. So there will be arguments about what complete relief means for an individual plaintiff.

But then there will also be these efforts to take it as a class action. I know this all sounds procedural and complicated and arcane. What it's about, though, is the series of unconstitutional orders that the administration has issued that to date, district courts have been able to say, hold your horses across the country. But now, if they say that the administration can still try their luck in other places.

JIMENEZ: Yes. I mean, I think it's part of why we're seeing more people trying to go to law school because of the specifics we just got into right there. I feel like I just took a quick class.

Harry Litman --

LITMAN: Well, thank you.

JIMENEZ: Yes. Of course.

LITMAN: You passed.

JIMENEZ: I didn't do much. Harry Litman, appreciate the time.

LITMAN: Likewise.

JIMENEZ: All right. Meanwhile, we're following a lot of stories right now, including Hostages Square in Tel Aviv packed tonight with antiwar protesters calling for an end to the Gaza war and a return of the remaining hostages. We're going to bring you the details.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:23:05]

JIMENEZ: Thousands of protesters taking to the streets in Israel tonight, calling for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to end the war in Gaza and bring the remaining hostages home. After President Trump was part of the effort to secure a ceasefire with Iran, some are now calling for him to push Netanyahu to make a deal.

CNN's Nic Robertson reports from the streets of Tel Aviv.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR (voice-over): On hold during the Iran conflict. Energized by the possibilities of that perceived victory.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Prime Minister Netanyahu, because he can and he must bring all the hostages back, the living and the deceased, because we want all of them at Coolum, at Coolum, at Coolum.

ROBERTSON: Free the hostage protesters in full voice at their first regular Saturday rally in three weeks. Viki Cohen, mother of hostage Nimrod, hopeful she'll get her 20-year-old son back soon.

VIKI COHEN, MOTHER OF HOSTAGE NIMROD COHEN: We feel that a little different. Trump is very demanding and we believe in him. We trust him and we know he has the power to stop the war. He can pressure our prime minister to do it, to finish the war in Gaza. And in this way, all the hostages can come back home.

ROBERTSON: The deal they want now is a comprehensive agreement. Bring all the hostages home, 50 of them, about 20 believed to be alive, and get the army out of Gaza.

(Voice-over): In Gaza, peace can't come soon enough either. Tents pitched on this sand, hit, rescuers say, by an Israeli airstrike early Saturday.

[19:25:02]

The IDF say they are looking into the incident. By daybreak, this night's horror revealed a huge crater and no tents.

The recovery not done. Alone with a shovel, Abu Mohammed searching for two children. Eight of their deceased brothers and sisters already found. Among the dead were children age 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9 and 10, and 11 years old. Mohammed says there were two boys, five girls, their mother and their grandmother.

In Tel Aviv, the days of war are counted by the second. Eyes of both sides on President Trump to stop the clock.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it's close. I just spoke with some of the people involved. It's a terrible situation that's going Gaza he's asking about and we think within the next week we're going to get a ceasefire.

ROBERTSON: President Trump is turning up the mood music for a possible deal in Gaza. Prime Minister Netanyahu's top confidant is expected in Washington soon. It hints at momentum, but Israelis have been here before. Hopes dashed by differences. Nic Robertson, CNN, Tel Aviv.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JIMENEZ: Nic Robertson, thank you for your reporting.

Meanwhile, crowds fill the streets of Tehran today for state funerals commemorating the people killed in recent Israeli strikes. They include top military commanders, at least six nuclear scientists and civilians.

CNN's Fred Pleitgen was there and filed this report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This is a gigantic procession right through the heart of Tehran. There are thousands of people here who are trying to touch the caskets. They're trying to give the folks who were on the caskets items to rub on the caskets.

Now, there are 60 coffins in total that are going through this city. Among them, Iran's top military leadership. You have the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hossein Salami. The head of Iran's missile program, Ali Hajizadeh. Many others as well, including nuclear scientists, but also civilians. There's also women and children whose caskets are in this procession right now.

People here say that they're honored to pay their final respects to those who were killed, but they're also vowing to continue to stand up for both the U.S. and Israel.

(Voice-over): "Death to America, death to Israel," she says. "God willing, they'll be destroyed soon."

"My message to Trump is, God willing, you will die," he says, "because you attacked Iran. And be sure the people will take revenge for the blood of these martyrs soon with the obliteration of Trump, Israel, and the United States."

All this comes as Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has lashed out at both the United States and Israel, saying he believes Iran's military campaign against the Israelis was victorious, and that also the U.S. had gained nothing from bombing Iran's nuclear installations.

At the same time, the Iranians are vowing to be defiant, saying that their nuclear program will continue. Of course enrichment will continue as well.

Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Tehran.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JIMENEZ: Thank you, Fred, for that reporting. And a lot of context on the situation right now, including tonight on

CNN following U.S. strikes on three of Iran's nuclear facilities, Fareed Zakaria is going to look at the fragile state of relations between the two countries, "UNITED STATES VERSUS IRAN, A FAREED ZAKARIA SPECIAL" airs at 9:00 Eastern.

All right. Also, the festivities are wrapping up tonight in northern Italy. There's Jeff Bezos and his now wife, Lauren Sanchez. We're going to bring you the details of the prime wedding coming up.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:33:25]

JIMENEZ: Welcome back, everyone.

California Governor Gavin Newsom is taking legal action against Fox News. The Democratic governor is suing the outlet for $787 million, alleging defamation in its coverage of a recent phone call between Newsom and President Donald Trump.

I want to bring in AXIOS' media correspondent and CNN media analyst Sara Fischer, who joins us now. So, Sara, I mean, can you just tell us about this lawsuit? What is the Governor claiming here?

SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST: He's basically claiming that Fox News host, Jesse Watters, his team, his show, deceptively edited a clip to sort of side with Donald Trump's timeline of when the two spoke during those L.A. raids and it's important to note here that, that $787 million is very symbolic, Omar, because that's how much Fox News was forced to pay in its defamation lawsuit in 2023 against Dominion Voting Systems.

Now, I should note, he is waging this lawsuit in his personal capacity, not as somebody who is campaigning or as a politician. And also, I should note, he has said he's willing, Gavin Newsom to drop this lawsuit if Jesse Watters apologizes on air. Of course, Fox has vehemently denied this. They said that they are going to defend Jesse Watters and Fox News. And I don't think it's likely you're going to see an apology on air -- Omar.

JIMENEZ: I don't think it's likely either. If it happens, you come back and you let me know.

Also, some other major media news this week, "Vogue" editor-in-chief, Anna Wintour, leaving that role. Obviously, such an iconic person at the top of, I mean, really an iconic brand. What is this going to mean for the global brand? What do they do now?

[19:35:02]

FISCHER: You know, Conde-Nast has been making a lot of shifts to sort of hedge against big changes, not just from the digital world, but also from icons like Anna Wintour that are going to be needing to step aside eventually. I mean, she's 75 years old.

One big thing that they did a few years ago is they elevated her from just being the head of "Vogue" to being the global chief content officer of all of Conde-Nast. That means that she plays key roles in other magazines. Most recently, she played a key role in hiring the new top editor at "Vanity Fair."

So, she will maintain that job as the global content chief even while she looks for somebody to replace her as the head of U.S. "Vogue." But I should note, Omar, I mean, her legacy is pretty profound, not just at "Vogue," but in the media industry. Most notably, she really is the person that pushed the Met Gala, a premier publishing event that was very admired by stars and celebrities in an era where traditional media has been struggling, that has been a huge win.

You know, she's also helped bring "Vogue" into the digital era, helped to streamline that publication. It will be very curious to see how her legacy lives on with a new global editor-in-chief.

JIMENEZ: Yes, Sara Fischer. That's why we bring you here. Thanks for breaking it down.

FISCHER: Thank you, Omar.

JIMENEZ: Of course, everyone else will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:41:01]

JIMENEZ: All right, everyone, welcome back.

We've been talking about it all night tonight. When would this procedural vote get underway for this bill to advance Trump's agenda? It appears to be getting underway right now.

I want to bring in our congressional reporter, Lauren Fox, who is there on the ground for us. Lauren, what do we know right now?

FOX: Yes, I mean, we just got the announcement from the Senate cloakroom announcing that the vote was beginning at 7:30 and at that point, it was about 7:31. So, that gives you a sense of just how quickly this came up.

But we have been waiting since 4:00 for this vote to get underway. We know that there was a lot of last-minute negotiations and horse trading happening on just waiting for official scores, how much this bill was going to cost? As well as leadership just mapping out the impact that various amendment votes might have on their final vote tally.

Now, this is just the very first procedural vote. This is an opportunity for them to get onto this bill, to continue negotiations on this bill, to continue discussions on this bill. But the reason it matters is it really does set off the process overall. Now, there are a few members we are going to be watching really

closely. Right now, we suspect that there are three members who are going to be voting against this bill. That means that they may have to bring in the Vice President to be a tie breaker. Those members include Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina who has said he has concerns about how steep some of these Medicaid cuts are and the impact it could have on rural hospitals in his state. He's also a member who's up for reelection in this next cycle.

We also expect that Ron Johnson will be opposed to this, because this bill does not have enough savings in it. He made that clear this morning that he did not plan to vote to get onto this bill and then we're watching Senator Rand Paul very closely. He's been consistent for weeks now that this bill just does not cut enough in spending and it will add too much to the deficit. So, those are three Republicans already.

Now, there's a handful of others that I'm watching really closely who have not said where they are going to be on this vote. That's Senator Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from the state of Alaska who has also expressed concerns about Medicaid cuts, as well as concerns about changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, more formerly known as food stamps, because there is a provision in this bill that does pass some of the burden of cost sharing onto the states. Right now, the federal government largely pays for that program. So, that's something she's been very outspoken about.

We're also watching Jerry Moran, a Republican from the State of Kansas, who has had some concerns about Medicaid and Mike Lee, another conservative who believes and has expressed concerns that this bill may add too much to the deficit.

So, that just gives you a sense of all of the votes we are still watching so closely. A lot of members really holding close to the vest what their next move is going to be, which obviously, makes this a process that's exciting for us to watch, but also a process that is a little bit unruly for Republican leadership.

Now, a lot of Republican leaders have made clear to us that they would not be going to the floor if they didn't anticipate that they had the support they needed. But again, this is just a preliminary step. This is going to kick off a very lengthy process that probably won't be finished until the "wee-hours" of Monday morning at the earliest, if they can get through this vote tonight.

JIMENEZ: And Lauren, I know you've talked about it tonight, but just briefly, can you just lay out what the next steps are here if this procedural vote goes through?

FOX: Yes, absolutely. So, the next steps of this is if they can get this procedural vote passed tonight, then the next step is that they will they will have a reading of the bill. We expect the Democrats are going to force that. That could take between 10 and 15 hours to complete. That gets you some time into tomorrow morning. At that point, they have between ten and probably 12 hours of debate, because we expect Republicans are going to yield some of their time back. That gets you into tomorrow evening, at that point, they would start

what is known as a "vote-a-rama." This is an opportunity for Republicans and Democrats to introduce a flurry of politically difficult votes and amendments for their colleagues to vote on. They can continue with that process for hours upon hours upon hours, until both parties agree that they are done. Usually that happens once they're just completely exhausted, and every member feels like they've gotten a vote on all of the amendments that they want to have, only then will they vote on the final bill.

[19:45:33]

That is obviously going to be the last opportunity lawmakers have on the Republican side to decide if this bill satisfies all of their concerns. So, this is really a moving target.

I'm told that this bill could develop over the next 24 hours. This bill could change in that amendment process that happens throughout Sunday night into early Monday morning. So, that just gives you a sense of what a marathon awaits lawmakers and their staff and the floor staff in the United States Senate as they get this all underway in the next couple of minutes.

JIMENEZ: And then after all of that, it would still need to go to the House.

Lauren Fox, I'm going to let you go follow this vote. We're going to stay close to you. And for everyone else, stay with CNN. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:50:59]

JIMENEZ: All right, some people living near Los Angeles say they have had it with the noise from those Waymo driverless taxis. It's been a tough month for Waymo. Maybe you've seen them on the road or even taken a ride in one. The robo-taxis are now in at least five major cities already. And while some say they can't wait to catch a ride in one, others say the beeping sound they make when backing up is torture. And it's led to some unconventional action by some.

Here is CNN's Nick Watt.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We just want the Waymo's to stop beeping at night. Hold on, sorry, sir. We have to -- oh, oh -- careful, careful, is there a person inside of it?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's no human inside of it. Okay.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Excellent, okay.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're on. We're on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're never interfering with the human driver.

NICK WATT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Just with the robots.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, we've explained that to the police as well.

WATT (voice over): Santa Monica residents faces hidden from security cameras, disabling self-driving, Waymo robot taxis. They call it stacking.

Man versus machine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Man versus machine, yes.

WATT (voice over):It's getting, near midnight.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We'll try lasering the next one.

WATT (voice over): They object to the robots flashing lights, backup beeps and the general hubbub keeping humans awake at night and disturbing their days.

WAYMO, ROBO-CAR: Please step back.

WATT (voice over): Stacker One, the O.G. asked us not to use his real name.

STACKER ONE: I for one, would walk down. The center of the alley.

You've got to stop honking, it's the middle of the night.

WATT (on camera): Waymo, tried to get a restraining order against you to stop you doing this.

STACKER ONE: True.

WATT (voice over): As we wrapped up talking to Stacker One.

STACKER ONE: Nick, she's citing them.

Robot gridlock.

WATT (on camera): Citing them for what?

WATT (voice over): Parking tickets. If there was a human behind the wheel, she couldn't.

WATT (on camera): Parked in the alley without a driver. That's the issue.

WATT (voice over): Under current California law, a robot can get a parking ticket, but not a traffic ticket. Lawmakers still working on that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think the solution is to treat these cars like they're cars. So you can watch it even now, it didn't stop at all at the stop sign. Its rolling -- it's rolled all the way, it stopped right at the edge.

WATT (voice over): This is a very visible example of a massive issue. We haven't figured out how we live alongside and legislate A.I.

HAMID EKBIA, DIRECTOR, AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS POLICY INSTITUTE: The public should be involved, in conversations before the fact, before these technologies are let loose. You know, all A.I. technology should go through this process.

WATT (voice over): Professor Ekbia heads the Autonomous Systems Policy Institute.

WATT (on camera): It's physical, we can see it. We can hear it. We can stand in front of it. But that's not always going to be the case.

EKBIA: No, no, trust me, no. So, we better do something before it's too late.

NANCY TAYLOR, RESIDENT: It's like a light show in Las. Vegas, so you have to have blackout curtains

WATT (on camera): Did the city or Waymo or anybody speak to the humans who live around here?

TAYLOR: No and I asked if I could come to their city council meeting to ask questions.

WATT (on camera): Right.

TAYLOR: And they said, oh, they have a waiver. There's not going to be a city council meeting.

WATT (voice over): Waymo wouldn't talk to us on camera. We strive to be good neighbors, a spokesperson told me via e-mail. They are working with the city as we explore and implement mitigations that address neighbors' concerns.

They have limited the human workers noise, planted some bamboo hoping to muffle. Stopped using one of the lots most nights and limited the robots' speed in the alleys, but they're still beeping.

TAYLOR: You know, they've not done enough. In fact, last night it was worse.

WATT (voice over): Santa Monica officials say this isn't loud enough to violate the city's basic noise ordinance.

STACKER ONE: I told them that this is a violation of the. Santa Monica noise ordinance prohibiting business support operations of any decibel level between 11:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M., and there's no mention of an exception that says if you get a robot to yell for you, you're allowed to do that at night.

WATT (on camera): What do you think the rest of us can learn from your experience as to how we should all progress through this age of A.I. as humans and robots are going to be coexisting? GRAYSON SMALL, RESIDENT: Doing things that we've never been able to do

in the past is great. But if it comes at the expense of humanity and human happiness and joy and being able to live life and not being inconvenienced constantly, what's the point?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JIMENEZ: Nick Watt, thank you, that's not how I imagined -- by the way, the human-robot war beginning, but there you have it.

All right, we're also following a lot of news today, including right on the Senate floor right now. The first vote on Trump's agenda bill, at least the first step. We'll explain coming up.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:00:00]