Return to Transcripts main page

First of All with Victor Blackwell

Fight Over Birthright Citizenship Leads To More Presidential Power; Descendant Of Man Whose Case Enshrined Birthright Citizenship Reacts To New Ruling; Environmental Groups Sue To Block Everyglades Detention Center; Army Veteran Self-Deports After Nearly 50 Years In The U.S.; Family Demands Bodycam Footage After Police Shooting Of 18- Year-Old Jabari Peoples. Aired 8-9a ET

Aired June 28, 2025 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:31]

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: First of all, the legal fight over birthright citizenship. It's not over, but President Trump did get a big win from the Supreme Court as he fights for the power to end it. Here's the most important point. The decision limits the ability of judges to block presidential orders nationwide. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote this for the majority. "When a court concludes that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too."

The case that led to this decision has to do with President Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship. That's a right addressed in this line of the 14th Amendment. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

Friday's ruling did not answer the question about whether the president can end birthright citizenship, but President Trump is seeing this moment as a victory in his effort. Now, right after the ruling, I want you to listen closely here. This is what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: That was meant for the babies of slaves. It wasn't meant for people trying to scam the system and come into the country on a vacation. This was, in fact, it was the same date, the exact same date, the end of the Civil War. It was meant for the babies of slaves. And it's so clean and so obvious. But this lets us go there and finally win that case because hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship. And it wasn't meant for that reason.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLACKWELL: So no, it wasn't on the day, the very end of the Civil War. But yes, the 14th Amendment was added to the Constitution after the Civil War, 1868. But birthright citizenship is not just for the babies of slaves, as the president says. We know this because of a Supreme Court ruling three 30 years later in 1898. The ruling was in the case of Wong Kim Ark. He was born in the United

States to Chinese immigrants. At that time, Chinese immigrants did not have the same rights as other people in this country. They could not even seek, could not apply for U.S. Citizenship.

Wong Kim Ark's story essentially raised the question for justices at that time. Could a person born in the United States be a Citizen under the 14th Amendment, even though their parents legally could not? The Supreme Court ruled. Yes.

Norman Wong knows this story better than anyone. He is Wong Kim Ark's great-grandson. Norman, thank you for being with me today. And so let's start broadly your reaction to the ruling from the Supreme Court. What do you think?

NORMAN WONG, GREAT-GRANDFATHER'S CASE ENSHRINED BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: What do I think? I'm saddened. I think our American dream is a dream of immigrants. And we put it on a plaque on the Statue of Liberty, and all we have to do is read the sonnet that Emma Lazarus wrote for the Statue of Liberty, and it embraces the poor and disenfranchised people. And now we're turning on back our backs on that dream. And we are a nation of immigrants, so we are actually turning our backs on our own heritage in a way. And I don't think we can afford to lose that dream. I really don't.

And I think what we're going to create a society of disenfranchised people in this country with no other country to go to or another nation, and yet they're not citizens. How are they supposed to live a proper life in this country?

And the idea that they're all thieves or criminals, you don't bring your family to a country and raise children with the idea that you're going to take, bring them to a crime scene to make a life.

BLACKWELL: You know what's interesting? I've read you said something, and I want you to expound, if you would, that you said that this fight over birthright citizenship is not about what the president is doing. It's about what the American people are feeling. Tell me more about that.

[08:05:04]

WONG: I grew up in the United States. I grew up in America. I grew up in the same thing that were a warm, loving people, that we were in this world to help other people, not to oppress them. And now we can't even take care of ourselves, and we can't even recognize our own family anymore. And I want to call them, they might not have paperwork, but they have family. On the original colonizers came to this country, did they really have paperwork? Did the Europeans that came in the 1800s, did they really have paperwork? I don't even believe birth certificates were issued until almost the 20th century.

So all of a sudden, who are going to disenfranchise? We're going to disenfranchise ourselves. If you look too deep.

BLACKWELL: Your great-grandfather's case came at a time at very strong anti-Chinese sentiment. It was the era of the Chinese Exclusion Act. Do you see the similarities between that time and this?

WONG: Yes and no. The fact that he could go to court and get justice. I'm not sure you can go to court and get justice anymore. That's a big difference. And he was born and raised in America. That the call for what? Yellow peril, all that. Look, you don't have a Chinaman's chance. So much anti-Chinese and anti-Asian hate, but he still could go to court and win. I don't know if he could do that anymore.

BLACKWELL: Norman Wong --

WONG: That's the big difference.

BLACKWELL: Listen, I know that as I read about your story, that this was not something that was discussed very much in your childhood. But now you have come to the forefront and have been telling your family story across the country. I appreciate you taking time to share your thoughts as we look ahead to later this year. Maybe next on a decision on birthright citizenship. Norman Wong, again, appreciate your time and your story.

Environmental groups, they're suing to stop the construction of a migrant detention facility that could open in a few days. They're worried about the impact on nature. But Florida officials say it's the wildlife near the site that'll make the site secure. They're even dubbing it alligator Alcatraz.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don't need to invest that much in the perimeter. People get out. There's not much waiting for them other than alligators and pythons. Nowhere to go, nowhere to hide.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLACKWELL: The Trump administration backs this idea. The Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem posted on X, New facilities will be in large part, they'll be funded by FEMA's Shelter and Services Program. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis walked through the Everglades site on Friday.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GOV. RON DESANTIS, (R) FLORIDA: This has no impact on Florida residents because some of that stuff can have an impact on them if it's in more populated areas. And so logistically, this really answers the call. You don't -- all you need is a little bus to move them, you know, about 2,000 feet that way, then get on a plane and they're gone.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLACKWELL: Yes, but that's not entirely true. There is an impact on people in Florida. The members of the Miccosukee Tribe and Seminole Nation alligator. Alcatraz is near the edge of the Miccosukee territory, and the tribe says they're opposed to the use of their ancestral lands. Miccosukee Tribe chairman Talbert Cypress joins me now. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your time and explain why you, as a

representative of the tribe, your specific opposition to this detention facility in that space.

TALBERT CYPRESS, CHAIRMAN, MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA: Thank you for having me. I appreciate the time. You know, the word has been put out that nobody lives out there, but that's mistaken. We have tribe members that live out there, Miccosukee tribe members and Seminole tribe members that live out there, and generations of Florida Gladesmen as well. And so to, you know, put this idea out there that it's a, you know, kind of like a wasteland or something like that is incorrect and misguided. And we've appreciated the governor's work and the president as well in Congress for the amount of dollars they put into Everglades restoration. And so doing this is a huge step backwards in that effort.

[08:10:03]

BLACKWELL: And so what do you say to the governor who says that there will be no environmental impact? I mean, this is without an environmental impact study for as much as we know. But, you know, the food and water will be trucked in, the waste will be trucked out. What's your reaction to that commitment from the state?

CYPRESS: No, we've sounded the alarm on this because the Everglades is a lifeline for the state of Florida. And we're not just protecting it for ourselves, but for each and every citizen that lives in Florida. And any kind of, you know, impact that is felt in the Everglades is going to be felt by everybody.

BLACKWELL: Listen here to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on what he believes is the real reason that there is this protest of this so- called alligator Alcatraz.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DESANTIS: I think people are just, they're trying to use the Everglades as a pretext just for the fact that they oppose immigration enforcement. I mean, let's be clear, like that's where you are on the far left now. They don't want the laws enforced at all. And you're seeing that with some of the demonstrations and some of the other things. And you have a right to have that view, but that is not the policy of the United States of America. That is not the policy of the state of Florida.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLACKWELL: So are you opposed to how this administration is executing the mass deportations? Does that inform your opposition to this facility?

CYPRESS: No, we keep it mainly about the Everglades and the environment right now. There's a detention center right next to our casino right now. So, you know, I don't think we've been opposed to the governor in his immigration stance, but we are pro-Everglades.

BLACKWELL: Has the state administration there engaged with you at all?

CYPRESS: Not. Not yet, no.

BLACKWELL: I understand from my producer, you're just back from Washington. According to Open Secrets, the Miccosukee tribe of Florida, in 2024, in that election cycle, donated $50,000 to Project Rescue America. That's the super PAC that supported Republican Rick Scott. $3,500 to reclaim America PAC. That's the Super PAC that supports Republican Marco Rubio. Have you reached out to either of their offices? Probably Scott, more than Rubio now that he's moved to the State Department. Have they been responsive to your plight at all? Have you spoken to them?

CYPRESS: No, we have not reached out yet. You know, this has been very fast-moving, and so we're trying to sound the alarm for now, and then we'll reach out to our delegates.

BLACKWELL: And so more than sounding the alarm, what's next?

CYPRESS: What's next is seeing all options that are available to the tribe and to the citizens of Florida.

BLACKWELL: Is that also possibly a lawsuit?

CYPRESS: We're kicking the tires on that.

BLACKWELL: Okay. Chairman Talbert Cypress of the Miccosukee Tribe of Florida, thank you for your time this morning. And we, of course, will follow this story.

BLACKWELL: The fate of Sean Combs is nearly in the hands of the jury. Coming up, a legal expert is here to grade the closing arguments and help us understand what comes next.

Plus, why an army veteran who was awarded a Purple Heart made the difficult decision to leave the country and his family as President Trump's immigration crackdown ramps up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:18:32]

BLACKWELL: On Monday, a jury will take up the case of Sean Diddy Combs. The prosecution got the last word on Friday. They accused the defense of making excuses for the music mogul and blaming his victims. The closing defense argument was that the prosecution exaggerated its case against Combs with evidence of his swingers lifestyle and personal drug problems. But not a criminal enterprise. If convicted on all counts, Combs could face life in prison.

Monique Pressley was with us when this trial started, and she is back with us now as it wraps up. She's an attorney, crisis manager, and host of Make It Make Sense with Monique Pressley. Good to have you this morning. Let's start here with this racketeering charge, arguably the most serious here. The defense attorney, Mark Agnifolo, highlighted to the jury that

there were none of those high-ranking deputies. The inner circle called. We hear about the ex-chief of staff, but she was not called as a witness. Do you find that problematic, and do you believe that the prosecutors have made their case on racketeering?

MONIQUE PRESSLEY, ATTORNEY, LEGAL ANALYST AND CRISIS MANAGER: No, I do not. I think that the racketeering charge was always the one that was the big stretch, something that we talked about before. And frankly, many of us who have been watching this case were waiting for the beef, waiting to figure out how you have a racketeering case when you don't have any conspirators who are charged. I have one. Then by the time the trial is ending, where none of the people who would be considered coconspirators have actually showed up in the courtroom, sat in a chair, sworn to tell the truth before a jury and given testimony that would support that. And so it really just seems where this the most serious of charges and the one where prosecutors have the most discretion is the one where it seems like they overcharged and basically reached for the moon and fell short.

[08:20:31]

BLACKWELL: So one of the prosecutors. Let's just keep going down the list here charges. One of the prosecutors, Kristi Slavic, told the jury that they don't need to find that every freak off or every hotel night was an instance of sex trafficking. They just define one. And the defense says, well, how was Sean Combs supposed to know which one was sex trafficking? Is the prosecutor right here? And what do you make about this rebuttal from the defense that if they don't know that they were all sex trafficking, how is Combs supposed to know?

PRESSLEY: Well, and that's an obvious one, right, that I think the jury will understand once they're instructed on Monday morning. There still has to be intent. You've got to prove the mens rea, the specific intent to commit a crime. You can't just do a thing and not know that it is a crime and not mean to do it. And for this particular offense, have it be the case.

Yes, the prosecution is right. You would need to see that it happened at least once. But it would have to be that it happened with intent and knowledge of the defendant. And it's going to be buttressed against the times when both parties would have to concede that the victims in this case, the alleged victims, permitted certain actions, made certain choices, did certain things of their own volition, left and came back to do them again.

And so the jury is going to have to balance that. Is that something that they would buy? That a person would 16 times intend to do a particular act, but then one night, absent any proof of physical coercion, that that one time was against their will. That's something that the jury is going to have to ferret and figure out.

BLACKWELL: The prostitution charges, the prosecutors put up this board. They showed 27 men that they say were engaged by Sean Diddy Combs. They only called two witnesses. Those two witnesses did not testify that they traveled across state lines, which would be the federal nexus. They say that they were not prostitutes, they were not paid for sex. However, there was sex and afterward they were paid. Who has the stronger case on this?

I mean, again, you remind us that the burden is on the prosecutor. But have they reached the threshold?

PRESSLEY: This is one, frankly, Victor, where I was surprised and a couple of other people, legal scholars who I've been doing analysis with were surprised because we thought that this was kind of the easiest of the charges. From the beginning, we thought this was the slam dunk. But then when it came to the state having to actually put up the proof and that they put on the stand, as you said, did not cross straight lines, which state lines, which is supposed to be required and don't really have it locked in, that even though there was payment, that the payment was by Mr. Combs and that it was for the purposes of sex. This is to me where the prosecution still has the stronger case compared to the other charges.

But as I said before, this is one of those weird niche times where a jury's going to do what they want to do. They're going to get those instructions. You hope that they're going to follow them to the letter because that's what makes the system work. But if they believe that they've seen enough for Prostitution and by the prosecution's argument on this, then I think that compared to the other charges is the one where we may expect to see a conviction.

BLACKWELL: Do you give predictions? Better question, will you give a prediction in this case?

PRESSLEY: I will say what should happen to me for sure is that there is a not guilty finding on the more serious offenses of racketeering. I think that there's been too much mud allowed in the water of other uncharged crimes for there to be a not guilty across the board. Mr. Combs attorney was correct when he said that would be a courageous, bold thing to do.

I'm not even certain based on the evidence, having not been in the courtroom every day, whether that would be the right thing to do. But I am certain that this prosecution overplayed their hand, overcharged the case, talked about victims that never made it into the courtroom, talked about conspirators that never made it into the courtroom, and juries have good memories for that.

[08:25:11]

If you overpromise, if you overcharge, if by the time they get the instructions, certain charges that they thought they were going to see aren't there, they start looking at the prosecution funny, not the defense.

BLACKWELL: All right, jury instructions on Monday and then deliberations right after. Monique Pressley, always good to have you. Thanks so much.

So my next guest served in the U.S. Army. He was awarded a Purple Heart but was facing the risk of deportation, so he chose to leave the country. That veteran joins us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:30:07]

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: For the past 48 years, nearly half a century, Sae Joon Park called the U.S. home. His family is here. His children are here. Sae Joon served in the U.S. army and was awarded a Purple Heart after he was shot nearly paralyzed in Panama. But now he's in South Korea. He says he came to the U.S. legally with a green card as a child.

But after his time in the military, he says that he struggled with PTSD and with substance abuse. In 2007, he says he pleaded guilty to a possession of a controlled substance. In 2009, he tells us he pleaded guilty to jumping bail. A year later, he says he was given a removal order from the government, but it was not enforced until now.

Sae Joon says that he was told he could either leave the country or be deported. Either way, it appeared he was no longer welcome here. He chose to leave on his own with hopes of coming back one day. Sae Joon Park and his lawyer, Danicole Ramos, they are with me now.

Sae Joon, good morning to you. Good morning to you as well, Attorney Ramos. But Sae Joon, let me start with you. And we've spoken with plenty of people on this show who have faced this choice with their attorneys as well. And they've decided to stay and fight it and risk detention.

Was there any part of you that ever thought, I'll stay here until they force me out? What was behind the decision to self deport?

SAE JOON PARK, U.S. ARMY VETERAN WHO CHOSE TO SELF-DEPORT: I didn't want to put my family through everything. And I knew that if I got detained, I wouldn't know how long I'd be staying detained for. And my chances are if I got detained, I was pretty sure that they were going to deport me. So I did talk with my lawyer and everything. And I thought, we thought the safest way for myself was to remove myself before I got detained.

BLACKWELL: We're showing the video of you with I presume is your family at the airport. Tell me about those moments.

PARK: It was very tough being that my mother is 85 years old and she has like early stages of dementia and my aunts and uncles, they're all old. So I was like the only one that was actually taking care of everyone and plus my son and my daughter. It was really tough knowing that this was like a one way trip and it was a sad moment.

BLACKWELL: Now, Attorney Ramos, the fact that he's hired you suggests that he's willing to fight to come back to the US. What are the avenues? What are the options here?

DANICOLE RAMOS, SAE JOON PARK'S ATTORNEY: Yes. So one thing we're currently looking at is the two convictions that occurred at the Queens County in New York that caused him to have his deportation order in the first place.

Those two convictions, as they currently stand, one of them being a possession of a controlled substance and then the other as a bail jumping, which is considered an aggravated felony in immigration law, is what is currently hindering him from coming back to the United States and having that deportation order stand.

So one thing that we recently submitted about a couple of weeks ago is we submitted a request to the Queens County District Attorney's office to drop the convictions that he had that caused his deportation order to start in the first place.

And by dropping those charges or replaying it to at least a misdemeanor, it gives us an opportunity to then reopen his removal case in immigration court, request the court to then vacate that removal order, and then gives him a pathway, hopefully, to come back to the United States. It's a very long process.

We're still awaiting the Queen's District Attorney's Office to respond to our requests, but we hope that considering the public outcry and support for Mr. Park, that they'll do the right thing and work with us to address his convictions and hopefully find a pathway for him to come back home.

BLACKWELL: What stands out Sae Joon, you're not just, I mean, you're not the only person that we've covered on this show who served in the U.S. military and has been ordered to leave. But it is one of the things that attracted us to want to talk with you. And I wonder, how do you view this order to self-deport in the context of your service to this country?

PARK: I just feel that it was unfair. I made my mistake. I did my time and I thought as long as I stay clean and do what I need to be doing, I was safe. That's what I was told until the new administration. And last year I did get a heads up warning from them saying that, oh, if Trump gets elected, there's a good chance that you might be getting deported. So I've been -- I do suffer from PTSD also, so it's been really rough for me.

[8:35:05]

BLACKWELL: Danicole, is it more difficult to appeal with Sae Joon in South Korea?

RAMOS: Yes, there is some difficulty with him being in South Korea to work on getting his convictions in the Queens County repleted or dropped. We've been told that in order for him to show if he if they do agree, if the Queens District Attorney's Office does agree to replete or drop his convictions, there was a chance that he would have to come in person to the United States.

And so in order for it to do that process would be long and arduous. We'd have to request what is called humanitarian parole for him to come back.

And with the current administration and the current climate, we're not too sure how long it would take for us to get that humanitarian parole granted or if we'll ever have the Oracle ever have the opportunity to even possibly work on doing the replete or dropping the charges while he's away in South Korea.

So, there's a lot of unknowns right now, but I think it's a reflection of the very complicated bureaucratic immigration system that we have.

BLACKWELL: Sae Joon Park, Danicole Ramos, we of course will follow this story. I thank you for sharing your time with us this morning.

An Alabama family has a really desperate plea after an 18 year old. Jabari Peoples he was shot and killed by police. His family says they've not received a clear enough answer as to what really happened. Their story is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:41:22]

BLACKWELL: The family of an 18-year-old shot and killed by police in Homewood, Alabama is demanding answers about what happened the night their son died. Police say they were investigating a suspicious vehicle Monday night when Jabari Peoples got into a fight with an officer. They say Jabari broke away from the officer and pulled a gun out of the car. The officer said that he feared for his life and fired his weapon once to defend himself.

The Peoples' family says that they heard nothing from law enforcement or the hospital Monday night. They got a call from the coroner's office Tuesday, more than 12 hours after Jabari died. In a statement, the family said this in part. We were denied the right to identify him. We were denied the right to be present. We were denied basic dignity.

Joining us now, Jabari Peoples mother, Vivian Sterling, his sister Tashara Peoples and their attorney Leroy Maxwell. Thank you all for being with me.

And Tashara, let me start with you. Police say that he had a gun and that he pulled that gun. What do you believe about that account?

TASHARA POEPLES, JABARI PEOPLES' SISTER: I do not believe that my brother was armed at all.

BLACKWELL: Do you know him to have been armed, to have owned a weapon, had access to a gun?

PEOPLES: No.

BLACKWELL: Attorney Maxwell, let me ask you. There is this question of the video. There is body cam video from Homewood Police. They released in a statement. Arrangements are being made to coordinate viewing of the video by Mr. Peoples family as the Homewood Police Department has relinquished this investigation to the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency. Only ALEA is authorized by law to release any recording of the incident. They say there are arrangements being made. Tell me about those

conversations.

LEORY MAXWELL, PEOPLES FAMILY ATTORNEY: Right. Thank you for having us. Arrangements? Absolutely not. I'm the person directly in communication with Alabama Law Enforcement Agency. Every single day since this tragic event occurred we've reached out, we've made formal requests, we've made the written requests to view the footage. We know there were surveillance video on polls at the park at the time. We know the officer had body camera footage on him. We've made all requests and every single day we are denied access to that footage and given no timeline whatsoever as to when we'll be able to access it.

BLACKWELL: Have they given you any answer? And we also called ALEA asking for information about this. They said they'd get us more, and then that never came even when we asked. Did they give you any information about why there had not been this handover of the video or any timeline?

MAXWELL: Absolutely not. Gotten no information whatsoever. Have not been given a timeline. And if the idea is to have trust, transparency in our law enforcement and who they are and what they're about, this is not how you do it.

Every single second that goes by where the family, the public isn't able to view the footage of what happened creates more and more mistrust. The individual that we know Jabari to have been respectful, bright future, wanted to be in law enforcement himself one day, worked at security at a hospital.

We know his character and from witness statements there, the idea of him possessing a gun, it's just sort of unconscionable. And so we need this video footage. It needs to be released immediately.

[08:45:06]

BLACKWELL: Vivian, to you. Can you tell me about the notification? Because that was another element of this that stood out. When you were notified, what had already happened by the time you got the information. Talk to me about how you were notified about your son's death.

VIVIAN STERLING, MOTHER OF JABARI PEOPLES: I wasn't notified. I just told him. I went to bed thinking my son was alive, and I woke up thinking he was alive. And I'm just going about my day. And the call actually came from the coroner's office to my other son. He came running and said, mama Jabari's shot. And I'm like, what you talking about? Where is he? I'm thinking somewhere, because he would have been had. Got off work that morning.

And I'm thinking it was somewhere in the area. And I'm like, what you mean? What you talking about? Is he OK? And he was like, hey, Dad. I said, why you say that? He said, this the coroner, and they said it was in Jefferson County. So I started calling around, just trying to see if he had ever made it to work or ever made it in. And it was just screaming. And I said, I ended up calling. I had his phone. So I got a number on

his phone and called on his old phone. And she was like. They told her that they had notified me, but she was like, the police killed him last night.

BLACKWELL: Tashara, to you. Leroy mentioned that your brother wanted to be in law enforcement himself. Tell me about that.

PEOPLES: Yes, Jabari had aspirations of joining the military and also eventually becoming a CIA agent. He also wanted to be a detective and solve murders.

BLACKWELL: He was, as I read, working security overnight. Had recently graduated high school. Leroy, finally to you, what now are the options to get the video? Are you considering a lawsuit to get it? How long will you wait for ALEA to release it?

MAXWELL: Well, at this point, everything's on the table. I think with the lack of response, the lack of transparency, the desperation of the family, desperation of the community. We've been put in a situation now where lawsuits are imminent. I think it has to happen within the next five days. I'm in conversations every single day with the family.

And right now, if law enforcement continues to be uncooperative, then we're going to have to move forward with a lawsuit. I'm urging them to do that, to ask for declaratory judgment in order to the court to release the video. And I think they're on board at this point. I think they understand, the community understands that the ball is being hidden from us.

You don't act this way if there's true transparency and there's nothing to hide. We want to see the video. And I think at this point, we have no choice but to file a civil action for the video.

BLACKWELL: Attorney Leroy Maxwell, Vivian Sterling, Tashara Peoples. Very sorry for your loss. I appreciate your time. Thank you. And we'll be back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:52:36]

BLACKWELL: Art is Life now. Quilts, they're reminders of home for the millions of African Americans who fled the Jim Crow south and a way to preserve family history. And that legacy is the heart of a new installation at the Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive.

I spoke to the curator and the museum's executive director about how this project came together even as it was impacted by federal funding cuts.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JULIE RODRIGUES WIDHOLM, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT BERKELEY ART MUSEUM AND PACIFIC FILM ARCHIVE: I'm Julie Rodrigues Widholm, Executive Director at Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive in Berkeley, California.

ELAINE YAU, ASSOCIATE CURATOR, BERKELEY ART MUSEUM AND PACIFIC FILM ARCHIVE: My name is Elaine Yau, Associate Curator and Academic Liaison at the Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive.

Quilt making for me is perhaps one of the most unique ways that we live with art as functional blankets. We sleep under them, we can wrap ourselves around in them, or if we inherit them, as heirlooms within the family. They are so often connected to the memory of a loved one or maybe even ancestor that we haven't met before.

WIDHOLM: We have the largest collection of African American quilts in the world to our knowledge, and we are very proud to be preserving, conserving, researching, and documenting and presenting this incredible material.

YAU: So much of the oral history is present and constantly evolving, and we've been able to hear from them, meaning such meaningful accounts of why quilt making has been such a vessel and a medium for expressing love and care for their families.

One particular family comes to mind. Laverne Brackens, Sherri Ann Bird, Beira Bird, four generations of quilt makers out of Fairfield, Texas. We really think of these families as co stewards of these artworks.

WIDHOLM: We received quite a large grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the conservation of the quilts.

[08:55:02]

I want to say it was about $460,000, which was a lot of support for us and a real important way for us to get this work off the ground. I think it was early April that the rest of the grant was going to be terminated immediately. So we lost about $260,000. And that was heartbreaking because the message that was being sent to us from the federal government was that this was no longer a priority for the American, you know, people to support this kind of work.

And we strongly disagree and we think this is the most important work that we need to be doing right now, which is why we are we're doing it and we're going to continue to do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: Now, if you're in the area, you can take your heirloom in for Quilt Documentation Day. It's happening today from noon to 4 local time. For more information on that and routed west 20th century African American Quilts in California, check out BAMPFA.org. Installation runs through November.

And remember, if you see something or someone that I should see, tell me. I'm on Instagram, TikTok, X, Bluesky. You can listen to our show as a podcast. And remember to tune in tonight for the premiere of "The United States versus Iran: A Fareed Zakaria Special." That's tonight at 9:00 Eastern only on CNN. Thank you so much for joining me today. Smerconish is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)