Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump Administration From Banning Enrollment Of Foreign Students At Harvard; Trump Targets Dem-Linked Groups, Dem Lawmakers, News Media; Stock Fall As Trump Threatens New Tariffs On E.U., Apple; Trump Threatens 50 Percent Tariff On All Goods From European Union. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired May 23, 2025 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST, INSIDE POLITICS: Today on Inside Politics, campus counter strike. A federal judge just blocked, at least for now, the Trump administration from banning Harvard from enrolling international students. The administration's move is part of the ever-expanding retribution tour and its impacts on higher education.

Plus, another sudden twist in the Trump trade roller coaster. The president this morning threatened the European Union with a 50 percent tariff on all goods. The question is, will it jump start negotiations with crucial allies or just rattle the markets?

And honoring the faith of the fallen. 80 plus years after paying the ultimate sacrifice and fighting Nazis Jewish World War II veterans are finally receiving the burials that reflect their faith. I traveled to Italy to witness the sacred ceremonies.

I'm Dana Bash. Let's go behind the headlines at Inside Politics.

And we start with the breaking news. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on the Trump administration's ban on Harvard's ability to enroll international students. Now that ban would impact nearly a quarter of the student body at Harvard. The administration says it's because of Harvard's handling of antisemitism on campus and that enrolling international students is a privilege, not a right. Harvard calls it quote, clear retaliation for refusing to bow to the White House demands.

I want to turn to CNN senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, who is going to explain in English what exactly this means. First of all, the -- what we just heard from the judge and broadly, what the actual case do you think both the administration and Harvard have here?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yeah. So, Dana, this ruling just came out minutes ago. It is a big win for Harvard, temporary, but very significant. What this says is the court is blocking the Trump administration from blocking Harvard from bringing in international students. In other words, as of this moment, it's back to the status quo, Harvard may continue to bring in international students.

Now, the way this case came about is the Trump administration sent a letter about a month ago in April to Harvard saying, essentially, we want the following information on every one of your 7000 international students. We want disciplinary records. We want records of any obstructive behavior by any of them, any dangerous behavior by any of them.

Harvard tried to comply, to the extent they could. Some of those terms are very general, but Harvard sent back documents to the Trump administration. The Trump administration said, nope, we're not satisfied, and therefore you can no longer accept these students.

Now the court today said, I'm putting that on hold. The judge said, I'm putting that on hold, because to block these international students would cause irreparable harm, both to the students, some of whom are currently enrolled at Harvard.

Suddenly, their status was in question. Can they go back, can they attend the summer semester? And to Harvard itself, which, as you said about a quarter of its entire student body are these international students. So, for the moment, Harvard is free to continue admitting these students, but the larger issue still has to play out in the courts.

BASH: And Elie, what legal basis does the Trump administration have for its actions here?

HONIG: So, it's not exactly clear to me. It seems like the Trump administration's legal position here is, we're the executive branch. We control these student visa programs, F1 and J1 student visa programs, and if we want to revoke them, we can revoke them. And by the way, we're doing this all to prevent antisemitism on campus.

However, Harvard's response to that in their brief that they put in yesterday is, first of all, it violates our First Amendment rights. It's not up to the government, the federal government, to micromanage speech and ideology on campus.

And then Harvard's second argument is, even if the administration had the right to do this, they have to comply with something called the Administrative Procedures Act, basically saying they have to go through a process. We're entitled to a hearing, we're entitled to an appeal, and none of that has been done yet.

And I think that's part of the reason we saw today's ruling as well. It seems to me, on the face of it, Harvard has a much stronger legal argument.

BASH: Elie, thank you so much for helping break that down for us. Appreciate it. Good to see you. And here at the table, I'm joined by an amazing group of reporters today, CNN's Jamie Gangel, Zolan Kanno- Youngs of The New York Times, CNN's Alayna Treene and Tia Mitchell of the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Happy Friday, everybody. Friday of a holiday weekend. Jamie, put this in perspective.

[12:05:00]

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: So, as Elie said, this is a big win for Harvard, but there is still uncertainty about how this is going to play out. Imagine if you're a student and you're wondering, you know, will I really be able to go to class in the fall. It's also not just international students at Harvard who are panicked about this. Every university is watching this. Every business is watching this, wondering, are we next?

And just a big picture. This is -- we were discussing this earlier. This is a real problem for our country right now, because we are seeing this throughout. We're seeing it at law firms. We're seeing at universities. We're seeing, you know, Tim Cook at Apple was told you're going to get a 25 percent tariff. Both Democrats and Republicans have said to me, this is what authoritarian capture looks like.

BASH: And so, what the administration is sort of going in with, and what they started to go in with at other schools, but Harvard in particular, has been -- you didn't handle the very raw, very real antisemitism that made Jewish students feel uncomfortable and unsafe for a long time, particularly after October 7 well, and so we are going to punish you.

What the administration did with their threats is went far beyond antisemitism, and they made demands from Harvard that were based on political ideology, having really nothing to do with antisemitism. And that's one of the things that Larry Summers, who has had a lot of jobs, a treasury secretary, but he was also the president of Harvard for a while. Here's what he said this morning on CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAWRENCE SUMMERS, FORMER HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT: This is extortion. It's a vendetta, using all powers of the government because of a political argument with Harvard. I've often been critical of Harvard on aspects relating to identity politics, antisemitism and much more, but that's not what this is about. This is about a vicious attack to pursue a personal agenda.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Zolan?

ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: You're right. I mean, there's the conversation about how universities handled protests on campus over the past year, right? But what we've seen is now, I believe there's eight different investigations from the federal government into Harvard right now.

We've seen the administration not just talk about their handling of antisemitism but also talk about who universities are hiring different levels of including diversity into the students that you're admitting and the people that you're hiring. There are those in the administration, even before these campus protests. I remember this from Trump round one, that felt that the Ivy Leagues in particular, almost set the tone for a more sort of liberal society that we would see and have tried to change the culture of those universities to have a university system that really does reflect MAGA in a way and reflects the ideology of the federal government.

And you're seeing now the sort of a hodgepodge of responses to these universities under that vein. Here also, you mentioned all the people, you know, companies and what have you that are responding just to this response when it comes to international students. I would add one more, and that's other nations as well.

One of the ways that the United States has strong relationships, even with adversaries like China, is through the relationship it has in collaboration with international students. You cut that off, it also is going to have a diplomatic ripple effect as well.

BASH: You know, I'm so glad you brought that up, because I was just reading an op-ed that Jason Furman, who also is an economics -- is an economist and an expert, who worked for Democrats, but also went to Harvard, and is now a Harvard professor. He wrote about exactly that -- about the fact that there has been untold benefit.

It's almost impossible to calculate how much the benefit that the U.S. has had historically in bringing over international students and then, of course, sending international students abroad. That's when it comes to maybe soft power or diplomacy. And then there's just the rock dollars and cents. He wrote here that the U.S. receives as much as $50 billion annually from foreign students.

[12:10:00]

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: No, I mean, it's also something that we've learned, and you've seen this in some of the reporting today that some of the money from these foreign students, from these international students, helps pay for the financial aid for domestic students.

BASH: Yeah.

TREENE: So, there's definitely an economic question here. I think your point, Zolan, about why the Trump administration is doing this, and looking more broadly at not just what they're doing with this lawsuit. But also, other things that they've done, it's very clear that this is a cultural issue for the Trump administration and for the White House.

And you have a lot of people in the White House who believe that Harvard and these other Ivy League institutions are not preaching and or they're preaching and they're practicing things that they shouldn't be. It's similar what we've seen with them trying to do in public schools about trying to change what the curriculums are.

They believe that they are too woke and that they need to take actions against them, and we saw them do this. This was related to some of the diversity practices that someone was talking about. Try to, you know, propose revoking their tax-exempt status. I mean, that is a sign of retribution and people inside the White House acknowledge that.

BASH: Well, yeah. So, there's retribution, which we're going to talk about in one second. And then there's the idea that they feel that they have a mandate, because the president campaigned on a lot of these issues, maybe not, you know, kicking out foreign students at Harvard, but what he calls the woke agenda.

I mean, that was a big part of what we heard over and over and over from him, and he won the election. So in in his mind, and in the mind of the people who work for him, they think that this is the way to go again, just back on the economics of this. According to Axios, U.S. startups valued at $1 billion or more, 44 percent are founded or co- founded by immigrants.

I don't have the data, but I believe that most -- oh, here you go. Around 24 founded or co-founded by international students, specifically from Harvard. And I would imagine a lot of those 44 percent that co-founded these startups beyond Harvard were educated in the United States.

TIA MITCHELL, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, THE ATLANTA JOURNAL- CONSTITUTION: I mean, President Trump doesn't have to look far. His main advisor, Elon Musk, is a very successful American businessman who's an immigrant, right? And so, I think, yes, this is about punishing students and universities, but I really think this is also part of Trump trying to reshape the American government system, reshape what we currently consider America's democracy.

And we know that one ways -- one way authoritarian leaders do so is by attacking free thought, free speech, and attacking facts. And we've seen him do that in how he is going after, you know, the academy, our higher education system, among other institutions in America. And so, to me, yes, Trump believes he has a mandate to kind of reshape our system in this way. He and his closest associates, I don't know if the American voters, that was what they had in mind.

BASH: And I just want to sort of come full circle to where you started, Jamie, which is just basic retribution, because this is one example. We have a list that we can put up in alphabetical order from ActBlue, all the way to the Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan, and note at the bottom, this is not even close to a comprehensive list.

GANGEL: Right. So, you know, Republicans oppose him. Let's primary them. Tim Cook doesn't move quickly enough, 25 percent tariff. E.U. 50 percent tariff. Bruce Springsteen, let's see what happens to him when he gets back, he posts. James Comey brought in for an interview for what was a knuckle-headed move.

But you know, there was an outsized reaction to that. I think that this goes back to Bob Woodward called his first book about Trump fear, because Trump had said to him that real power is based on fear. I'm paraphrasing here, and that's what's going on.

The question is, when Donald Trump talks about making America great again, is this really what voters had in mind, the brain drain, people who will be lost. You mentioned Elon Musk, innovators, doctors, scientists, those are people who do make America great.

BASH: All right. Everybody standby, up next. Trying to take a bite of the apple. You just heard Jamie talking about Tim Cook. Well, how tariffs are playing into President Trump's latest fight with Apple. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: President Trump is ratcheting up his trade war again this morning with a threat on tariffs, 50 percent tariff, to be specific, on the European Union. He also directed his ire. You heard a little bit about this in the last segment at Apple, threatening a 25 percent tariff there, unless that company moves iPhone production to the United States.

Now, one tech analyst tells CNN, that would be difficult to impossible, even if it happened, it could make iPhones cost $3,500. My smart reporters are back around the table. I do want to do a fact check on that because we can talk about that another time.

[12:20:00]

What are your thoughts on the goal, and what are you hearing more importantly from your sources about the president's goal with these two? Is it to actually do it or is it to get negotiations back on track?

KANNO-YOUNGS: It seems so far that this is, I mean, at least when you talk to people in the administration, it's about getting negotiations back on track. They don't like the pace of the E.U.'s response, and there have been talks between the E.U. and the administration thus far.

That being said, you know, I've written about this previously, it is hard at times to be able to tell is the threat of tariffs actually something that is going to come to fruition or is it actually a message back to the president's base of, look at what I'm willing to do. Look how I'm willing to bring the fight against these places that I am telling you have been ripping us off.

Is this more about providing the optics of winning these negotiations, while keeping the benchmarks completely ambiguous, or is it actually going to be a meaningful measure when it comes to talks with the E.U.

BASH: Right.

KANNO-YOUNGS: The past would show us that at times, it's the optics.

BASH: Right. Because if you think about if he ends up following through, a lot of people who are part of his base who really, really separate. Let's just give an example and put some meat on the bones. As I like to say here. Top U.S. export destinations in 2024, the European Union is the top customer of the United States.

By the way, Canada, Mexico, China and ASEAN countries are not far behind. And then when you look at the specifics, you're talking about crude oil, aircraft equipment, pharmaceutical products, natural gas engines and more.

TREENE: Yeah. Look, so much of this when it relates to the -- as it relates to the E.U., is the president personally -- how his personal feelings and his personal views of what the E.U. is doing. One of it is, of course, he's been so fixated on how Europe, in his eyes, has treated him, and how he believes that they've been treating the United States.

As you saw in his post this morning, he cited that they are not being, you know, good faith in negotiations. We actually heard the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent say something similar, that he believes that the E.U. is not negotiating in as good faith as the rest of the trading partners that they are talking to.

But it all has to do again with how he's feeling about it, and that's part of why you also saw him wake up this morning and post about Apple, because that's something that's been on his mind. But the thing that's also interesting about the E.U. is, you know, just a few weeks ago, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni was at the White House, and really that was -- I remember when I was talking to a lot of people at the White House and the Trump administration.

At the time, they were hoping that those conversations would go really well. They know that the two of them have a good relationship. That's obviously why they had her be the representative for the entire European bloc. But since then, the president does not feel like there's been enough movement, and he's continued to get very frustrated by Europe and that's why we're seeing this.

BASH: You mentioned, Scott Bessent, the treasury secretary. Let's listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: A pause on the April 2 tariffs was based on countries or trade blocs coming to us and negotiating in good faith. And I believe the president believes that the E.U. proposals have not been of the same quality that we've seen from our other important trading partners. I'm not going to negotiate on TV, but I would hope that this would light a fire under the E.U.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MITCHELL: Yeah. So, it comes across as a negotiating tool, but it also allows the Trump administration to set this high bar, put the markets, you know, have everyone panicking, and then in days or a couple of weeks, they come back and say, we've now struck a deal and the tariffs are going down, but still higher than what they were. So, consumers will still feel the pain no matter what, and then it becomes a question of what exactly is the goal here? I think that is what still is confusing, because even when it comes to Apple, and President Trump has said, I want iPhones to be made in America, which is very specific about a specific product that would be difficult to make in America without costs going up.

But then they in similar announcements he's made, he hasn't stuck to that. He said, I want to move this manufacturing to America, and then when he gets the message that there's a lot of pain, or again, when the countries, or when the companies come ready to negotiate, then he backs off. And I think that creates again a really inconsistent message for voters, but the pain still falls on both voters, both with the stock market tumbling and with ultimately prices for a lot of goods going up.

BASH: And when it comes to Apple, I think this is such an interesting sort of test case because, first of all, it's something that pretty much every American at this point can understand and can relate to. We have these phones. It is one of the biggest exports, sort of, you know, IP exports, an intellectual property, not Inside Politics. And he's thinking like you were saying, this is our thing. Why are we making them overseas? Listen to what the Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, has said about that.

[12:25:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOWARD LUTNICK, COMMERCE SECRETARY: The army of millions and millions of human beings screwing in little, little screws to make iPhones, that kind of thing is going to come to America. It's going to be automated, and great Americans, the trade craft of America, is going to fix them, is going to work on them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: I mean, it would be nice. It's a nice goal.

GANGEL: My understanding is there are about 470,000 manufacturing jobs empty now in the United States. I am not sure that screwing in the little screw is what Americans that these are jobs that they want. But also, we have to keep in mind this kind of, you know, bringing this kind of manufacturing to the United States is not going to happen overnight. It is going to take years. And the question is, Tim Cook, others, are they just going to wait Trump out?

TREENE: Well, the thing about that just very quickly is, you know, Tim Cook was actually at the White House just days ago, on Tuesday, and so he's -- to your point about waiting him out. He is trying very hard not to do -- I think he's trying to get through to him in person, like we've seen with Amazon and Zuckerberg at Facebook, not always working.

BASH: We unfortunately have to sneak in a quick break. I just -- we talked a lot on the show yesterday about that mean coin dinner that the president had last night. Alayna has some terrific reporting. Check it out on cnn.com. It's really great. Coming up. Sunday marks five years since George Floyd's death rocked the nation. We'll discuss how his murder and the landmark protest that followed changed our politics. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)