Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump Admin Plans To Federalize Troops In Chicago; As Shutdown Enters Day Five, Who's Getting Cold Feet? Tomorrow: Indirect Israel- Hamas Talks Set to Start in Egypt; Supreme Court Returns with Huge Stakes for Trump. Aired 8-9a ET

Aired October 05, 2025 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:38]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST (voice-over): Tinderbox.

GOV. J.B. PRITZKER (D), ILLINOIS: The constitutional crisis is not on its way. It is here.

RAJU: Trump authorizes National Guard troops for Chicago. Is the clash reaching a boiling point?

And stalemate --

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: They should sit down and negotiate.

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: There's nothing to negotiate.

RAJU: -- as both sides dig in on a shutdown.

And the White House threatens mass layoffs. Who is getting cold feet?

Plus, back to the bench. The justices return tomorrow to take on tariffs, guns and transgender athletes. Will they hand more power to the president?

And hopping mad, after MAGA world explodes over Bad Bunny at the Super Bowl.

KRISTI NOEM, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: I think people should not be coming to the Super Bowl unless they're law-abiding Americans who love this country.

RAJU: The superstar hits back on SNL. Will he follow Beyonce and Eminem's lead and play political football?

INSIDE POLITICS, the best reporting from inside the corridors of power, starts now. (MUSIC)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU (on camera): Good morning and welcome to INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. I'm Manu Raju.

This weekend, already high tensions in Chicago ratcheting up sharply after a massive ICE operation where witness saw -- witnesses saw a military style raid with a helicopter and some children zip tied together. And then last night, President Trump authorized 300 Illinois National Guard troops to be sent to the nations third largest city, to quote, protect federal officers and assets all over the furious objections of Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker, who said, quote, the Trump administrations department of war gave me an ultimatum call up your troops, or we will.

It was a dramatic escalation in Trump's fight with Democratic led cities. And it came as he suffered a setback in Portland, Oregon, where a judge temporarily blocked his plan to deploy 200 national guard troops there.

And on Friday, Pritzker issued this warning about Trump's latest moves.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRITZKER: My message of alarm is that the constitutional crisis is not on its way. It is here, and we all better start acting like it.

(APPLAUSE)

PRITZKER: Donald Trump is deploying active duty marines in Washington, D.C., and California and Portland, and apparently soon to Chicago, because he wants you to get used to the idea of the military roaming our streets. Our resistance to all of this has to be loud, and it has to be strong. We have to speak plainly about the dangers that are ahead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: All right. Let's break this down with my excellent panel this morning. Jasmine Wright of "NOTUS"; "Punchbowl News's" John Bresnahan, and CNN's Priscilla Alvarez.

Good morning to you all.

Priscilla, you covered this so closely. Everything the administration has been doing on this immigration crackdown, this comes in the aftermath of what we saw in Chicago, this raid, 37 people arrested and this, you know, the headline there on CNN, as you can see on the screen.

But now, we're seeing Trump move forward with the National Guard. He's been threatening this for weeks and weeks. He's finally doing it. How do we expect this to play out? PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, he's trying to do it the

way that he did it in Los Angeles when they deployed National Guard troops there and we saw something that we hadn't seen before, which was these troops essentially serving as a security perimeter for ICE agents and Customs and Border Protection agents as they carried out these immigration arrests.

So, this is something that the administration has been thinking about for a long time. I mean, my sources had told me that. How to fold in the military into immigration enforcement was a discussion within the White House and the transition for months. And so that's what we're seeing start to come to fruition. We saw it in Los Angeles. We saw it in Portland with the threat to send troops there, though now we have the federal judge that's blocking that. And in Chicago now, much of the same.

So, the administration is using what is happening on the ground to serve as the pretext for moving forward with this military crackdown. And two things can be true here, Manu. It is true that there have been threats and assaults on ICE agents. We saw, for example, in Dallas when there was a shooting at a Dallas ICE facility.

But it is also true that they are using aggressive tactics in their enforcement of immigration law.

[08:05:02]

And so that is where everything is sort of coming to a head and the administration is trying to bring in these national guard troops.

Now, what these rulings have said so far are quite telling. In Los Angeles, we saw they blocked the administration from using National Guard troops, but the Portland -- the judge regarding the Portland deployment said this. I'm just going to read one line here.

It says, the administration, quote, "made a range of arrangements that, if accepted, risk blurring the line between civil and military federal power to the detriment of this nation."

I think that's really at the crux of the conversation now, as the administration and the president in particular continues to say that he's going to send troops to these cities.

RAJU: Yeah, and the administration says it's going to fight that ruling, of course. And they -- and they certainly are going to look at sending more troops into other cities.

This is just so viewers remind you where the administration has targeted so far in sending national guard troops. And we've seen Washington, D.C. now going to Chicago, L.A. we saw this effort in Portland. Now it's been temporarily blocked by a judge. Memphis was the news from this past week.

Each of these cities has sort of dealt with this a little bit differently. You saw the big fights happening in Los Angeles and Portland now in Chicago. Washington has been more open to it. Memphis has been more open to it.

What are you hearing? You cover the White House. What are you hearing about all this?

JASMINE WRIGHT, NOTUS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Well, we know that the president has been itching to get into Chicago. Just a few weeks ago, he said, I want J.B. Pritzker to come and ask me, something that he hadn't actually said about other states governors before. I want him to come and ask me to send the troops in, and I will help him clean up the crime in Chicago.

And so this is a part of the administrations wider effort to do what they say is make America great, make America great again, which is to clean up crime.

And so, obviously, I think that were going to see a large pushback from the state of Illinois when it comes to filing lawsuits, trying to prevent the deploying of military members. But then you're going to see a robust response from the White House, because this is something that Donald Trump has really been, in some ways, fixated on, not just the crime issue, but of course, Chicago. Chicago has been a long target for this president.

And he truly believes, maybe even more so than Portland, maybe even more so than Los Angeles, that there is an insane crime problem in Chicago, and that is justifying his efforts. Now, the people in Chicago don't agree. The governor of Illinois does not agree. The people in Chicago saw that raid on that south shore neighborhood, a place I just grew up a few blocks away from there in Chicago as an in -- incredible overreach of military action.

And so, you're going to see not just the elected officials in Chicago pushback. I mean, I'm not in the business of predictions, but I think you're also going to see the people of Chicago push back, and you're going to start to see some of those protests, because Chicago is a city that likes to get involved in protests.

RAJU: Yeah. And so, also over the weekend, federal agents shot what they call the Department of Homeland Security, said defensive shots at a woman after, according to Homeland Security Department, she rammed a law enforcement vehicle in Chicago.

And there in Stephen Miller, one of the top White House officials responded to this, saying, "The issue now is very simple and simple and clear. There's a large and growing movement of left-wing terrorism in this country." And he says, "Well-organized and funded, it is shielded by far-left Democrat judges, prosecutors and attorney generals. He said the only remedy is to use legitimate state power to dismantle terrorism and terror networks".

It's pretty bold warning there.

JOHN BRESNAHAN, PUNCHBOWL NEWS CO-FOUNDER: And then what he, Miller, also who we both know he worked on the Hill before and he worked on the first Trump administration. He called the Portland ruling, I believe he called it legal insurrection. So, the language coming out of Stephen Miller, coming out of the White

House, not just Trump, is stunning.

What we -- what you don't mention on that chart you had, remember, they had Marines in Los Angeles. He's deployed active duty military to the border. He is -- he's definitely blurring the line.

And there was a report that he -- that Hegseth -- Defense Secretary Hegseth wanted to use the 82nd Airborne in Portland, or send some elements of the 82nd Airborne, which is one of the top elite combat units in the United States military to Portland.

So, I mean, it's stunning. We've seen that in large scale riots. But we've not seen it. And there and there's definitely unrest. There's definitely protesting, but we've never seen something like this. And where they're going is just -- it's a -- it is -- it's an unprecedented launch.

RAJU: Yeah, and the question is how did Democrats handle this too? Because this is going to be something that we -- it's going to be an issue. It's going to play out in the midterms. And this is crime, crime and immigration. We've seen how that's played in the past election cycle.

What does it mean now as Trump is dealing with this military style crackdown? That's going to be a big question we're going to explore.

I do want to talk about the uproar in MAGA world from this past week, when it was announced that the Puerto Rican superstar Bad Bunny was the halftime will be the halftime performer at the upcoming Super Bowl.

[08:10:00]

Of course, Bad Bunny has been very critical of ICE. He has only -- he has not had any concert tours in the -- in the Continental United States. MAGA world has said that he should not be performing in the Super Bowl in front of tens of millions of people, given his positions on all of this.

So last night, he was on Saturday night live and he addressed some of this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BAD BUNNY, SINGER: It's everyone's achievement, proving that no one can ever erase or take away (Latinos') mark and our contribution to this country.

(APPLAUSE)

BAD BUNNY: And if you didn't understand what I just said, you have four months to learn.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: What are you hearing about all this?

ALVAREZ: Okay, so the Department of Homeland Security, the Secretary Kristi Noem, has had some stern words about this, saying that the Super Bowl is only for law abiding citizens, sort of having this, like, veiled threat towards the NFL about all of this.

But just to take a step back, because I've covered the Department of Homeland Security for a long time, they always have a massive presence at the Super Bowl. It is one of their largest events that they have to provide security for. So, this discussion about, is ICE going to have an increased presence there? Is maybe worth having, but they already are there because it is such a massive event that they have to provide security for.

Bad bunny, to your point, has shared concerns of racial profiling, and he is afraid that if he had concerts in the United States, that ICE would swarm those concerts and try to target those that are there. But when it comes to citizens, Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens.

So, you know this -- we'll see where this heads. But just my points on this are, ICE has always had a presence there. We'll see if they increase it. But it is also true that Latinos are U.S. citizens that will be attending and can attend.

RAJU: Yeah. And so far, the NFL is sticking with this plan and it doesn't look like they are going to back off despite this uproar.

All right. Coming up, just how bad is the government shutdown going to get and which party is winning the argument. And will all that change when voters are starting to feel the real shutdown pain this week? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:16:41]

RAJU: The federal government shutdown is now at day five, now tied for the 10th longest in U.S. history. But here in Washington, there is growing concern that this crisis could be historically painful and extend much, much longer in this norm-shattering era of American politics.

There are no negotiations between congressional leaders, and senators have been gone for the weekend. The House is also not coming back into session this week.

President Trump also, he's been largely out of sight since the crisis began last week.

My panel is back with me now.

All right, Bresnahan, we have covered a lot of these shutdowns. Too many of these shutdown.

BRESNAHAN: 1995 is my first. RAJU: Well, there you go. My first was the 2013 shutdown that Ted Cruz

was pushing to defund Obamacare. We don't need to talk about that, though. We want to talk about this one.

And the question that I get from so many people is, how long is this going to go? And how painful is this going to get? And do we think this is going to end anytime soon? What's your answer to those questions?

BRESNAHAN: I was just talking to somebody on the before we came on the air. There was a lot of rumors on Friday that Senate Democrats were going to give in, and there was a vote to reopen the government on Friday, and that some moderate Senate Democrats would give in. They didn't.

There'll be another vote tomorrow in the Senate. The House is gone. They're on the sidelines here. I just don't feel like it's moving anywhere. Their senators are furiously calling each other all weekend up, especially Jeanne Shaheen and some --

RAJU: It's the rank-and-file senators.

BRESNAHAN: It's the rank and file.

RAJU: It's not the leadership.

BRESNAHAN: Schumer's -- Schumer is doing, we're getting a full -- we're seeing the full Chuck Schumer here. He's calling everybody in the world, but he's held them together so far. And right now, it looks like they'll continue to vote no.

I mean, I think Trump is actually help them. Trump and Russ Vought, what they've done. They've canceled $27 billion worth of projects in blue states. And that's just made Democrats more dug in. Thats just made them -- their resolve, it's increased their resolve.

So, I think -- and then there's a question, do they have to solve that before they can get a deal? When I've asked Hakeem Jeffries and other, and John Thune and everybody about this and they don't talk about it.

I don't see any deal coming in the next day or two. But when it comes, it's not going to be like, there's not going to be like a certain number of senators. They'll be like 25 or 30. It'll be -- it'll be a -- it'll be a big number.

So, but right now, I mean, I could see us going through the week, federal -- some federal employees --

RAJU: At least through this.

BRESNAHAN: And some federal employees are going to start missing paychecks on the 10th.

RAJU: Yeah.

BRESNAHAN: They're going to start. That's when the first round of them. But the military paychecks is the 15th, and that's a big deal. And you will see Republicans try to push bills to pay the military this week. And what do Democrats do on that? I don't think they can let it go, but that puts them in a bad spot.

RAJU: Yeah. That does. And that's the question. When people start missing their paychecks, when people start feeling the pain, which side is going to listen to that, which side is going to move off of it?

And just to remind folks, the Senate, the Republicans have been pushing a straight extension of government funding to reopen the government up until November 21st. Democrats have blocked that for times because they want to extend these expiring subsidies to help pay people, pay for their health care insurance under Obamacare, those are set to expire at years end. The Democrats say, is that you got to deal with this now because of open enrollment. People's premiums increasing. They also want to fight reverse some of the Medicaid cuts that were included in Trump's One Big, Beautiful Bill Act.

[08:20:02]

Republicans say negotiate that stuff later. Let's just reopen the government. That's essentially where they are right now.

And in the meantime, there's this thread -- the White House is referring to -- of mass layoffs, not just furloughs of federal employees going much further than the White House -- than past shutdowns, full on firings. There's been some pushback, though, among senate Republicans on this issue, Thom Tillis being one of them, saying if the OMB goes about canceling things that were foundational to pass compromises, you destroy the credibility of future compromises. Senator Susan Collins up for reelection, the chairwoman of the senate appropriations committee said they should not be treated as pawns amid a partisan impasse. She, along with Lisa Murkowski, raising concerns as well.

Why -- the White House had said that these layoffs were coming in one to two days. It has not happened yet.

WRIGHT: Yeah, it's not happened yet. And so, there's a question about when that announcement comes. The White House has been pretty firm, in which they're kind of saying the quiet part out loud, which is that they find this as an opportunity, a unfortunate opportunity is their language, but still an opportunity to do some of the things like reshaping the government, something that Russ Vought, the chair of or the leader of OMB, has wanted to do for a long time and has studied how to do for a long time.

And so, you know, they said one to two days, we can well hear from them, likely on Monday. We'll hear from President Trump later on today. We'll see if that timeline has shifted.

But fundamentally, the White House believes that if there were to do riffs, one source told me that it would be based on what they believe is a legal grounds to do so. And so, they recognize that there could be lawsuits. Already, unions have kind of preemptively sued at the thought that there would be some sort of layoffs.

But they believe that if they were to do riffs, they would be, done legally. And they acknowledge that because of this kind of gray area in which we haven't really seen these sort of layoffs done before in a shutdown, that this would be setting a precedent. They say it's not purposeful, but still they would be setting a precedent on how future shutdowns could go.

And so, I think a lot of a lot is riding on this, not just changing the messaging from Democrats or shutting the government down to now we are taking the opportunity to reshape the government as the government is shut down, but certainly setting legal precedent and opening themselves up to a lot of legal issues.

RAJU: Yeah, and Bres referring to a reduction in forces, that is an effort to potentially fire all these federal employees. We've already seen hundreds of thousands furloughed at this moment. And there's a question about how Trump is dealing with this.

We've seen in shutdowns past, presidents go out there and use their bully pulpit and try to beat the opposition into submission of sorts.

Just look at a little flashback of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and how they dealt with the crises when it happened under them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL CLINTON, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: Unfortunately, Republican leaders in Washington have put ideology ahead of common sense and shared values in their pursuit of a budget plan.

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: If Republicans aren't willing to set aside some of their partisan concerns in order to do what's right for the country, we stand a good chance of defaulting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Trump has really not been seen since October 1st, when the shutdown began. He's been posting a lot on Truth Social. That's been his choice. You can see right there on your screen some of the things that he's done attacking Democrats, a much different tactic from Trump.

ALVAREZ: Well, and we're going to --

RAJU: See, compared to Clinton and Obama.

ALVAREZ: Yeah, and we'll see him later today and we'll see what he says then. But I think just a through line in all of this is the digging in. Like he is someone who also digs in. So where is he going to stand on this?

And then there's also the opportunity. Well, in terms of opportunity and who is going to feel the cost in terms of opportunity? In addition to the layoffs, the administration is still moving forward with their for example, immigration agenda. It does not affect that. They may not get paid, but all of those agents are still doing the work.

And so, in terms of them being able to push forward what they want, they are doing that. Then it comes down to the politics and who our constituents going to see as at fault for the shutdown, Democrats or Republicans? And we'll see how that plays into the strategy.

RAJU: Yeah. And Trump is not one to known to give in when he's facing a lot of pressure. The question is going to be also, how do Democrats deal with it, as we were just discussing here? And whether the public is on their side?

The question about whether Obamacare subsidies should be extended? Okay, there is actually significant support among the American public. This is, of course, what the Democratic position is. They should extend these expiring subsidies, really majority support.

The question, though, is that do voters want that in -- that fight to happen leading to a government shutdown? That is -- that was not the question here in the poll asking voters saying, are you okay with the government shutting down over this? The question then is which Democrats ultimately start to buckle?

Look at the number of Democrats who voted back in March to extend government funding up until September 30th.

[08:25:04]

There were 10 at that time. The magic number right now is eight Democrats who they'll need to break ranks, just three so far. You can see on your screen there, Catherine Cortez Masto, Jeanne -- John Fetterman and Angus King. The three Democrats. King, of course, is an independent who caucuses with Democrats. But they need eight total.

So why do those other ones, those swing vote Democrats? How do they feel at this moment? I put that question to several of them last week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Are you going to vote no on the C.R.? Are you going to keep voting? No.

SEN. MAGGIE HASSAN (D-NH): We need a bipartisan path forward.

In order to get to a deal that protects people's health care and prevents their premiums from doubling.

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND (D-NY): Nothing's been done on getting cost of groceries or electric bills or insurance bills down. And New Yorkers can't take it. We just can't take it.

RAJU: Why did you vote now? What changed from March?

SEN. GARY PETERS (D-MI): Roll the tape. Well, it's about health care. So here we have 24 million people who are going to see a doubling of their premiums.

RAJU: Why not negotiate that later? Keep it open now --

PETERS: Because they're going to get their notices on November 1st. They have to make decisions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Do you think any of them are going to cave? I mean, are Democrats going to do it? Or I guess at the end of the day, they listen to Chuck Schumer. It's Chuck Schumer is the question.

BRESNAHAN: But that's where we're talking about before. There's been -- we've seen the Schumer this weekend. He's calling everybody in the world. I mean, I think Hasan is one they'll watch, Maggie Hassan, because they're watching Jeanne Shaheen. I would think they would go together if they go, and then Gary Peters retiring.

But I -- this is my point originally is like, I don't think it'll be -- they'll get to like eight and that'll be it. They'll be a jailbreak. They'll be a deal. And then --

RAJU: Yeah, what's the -- what is the end game for Democrats. What do they think is a victory here?

BRESNAHAN: That something on Obamacare that has -- they have to have it now. They're not going to be able to roll back the One Big, Beautiful Bill in these giant Medicaid cuts. They they're just not going to do that. But if they can get something on Obamacare premiums, that would be a big win for them.

RAJU: Yeah. All right. We shall see. This could last for some time. It's a really consequential week here in Washington.

But up next for us, things are also moving very quickly in the Middle East where Israel and Hamas are scrambling amid pressure from the U.S. So, what really is happening on the ground? We'll have a reality check from the region.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:31:50]

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST: Tuesday marks two years since the brutal Hamas attack on Israel. And the horrific war in Gaza has continued to rage on ever since.

But movement on a potential ceasefire continued through the weekend. President Trump posted on social media yesterday that Israel had agreed to, quote, "an initial withdrawal deadline" and that if Hamas agrees, a ceasefire will be, quote, "effective immediately" with hostages and prisoners released.

So just how likely is that to happen?

Well, to answer that question, CNN's Oren Liebermann, who joins me live from Jerusalem. So, Oren, just how close are they to a ceasefire agreement? And are Trump and Netanyahu -- are they actually on the same page?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN JERUSALEM BUREAU CHIEF AND CORRESPONDENT: Well Manu, we are closer to a ceasefire agreement than we have been in many, many months. But that doesn't mean we're there yet.

And when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave a short, televised statement last night, even he acknowledged that although he was optimistic that this could all end in the coming days, that's not a guarantee at this point.

And there are still some sensitive and difficult issues that have to be worked out even if at least in principle, Israel and Hamas have agreed to President Donald Trump's 20-point proposal.

One of the issues, as you point out, is the withdrawal map itself. Under the current map, one which Trump endorsed on social media, Israel will hold and occupy the vast majority of Gaza after Hamas releases all of the hostages.

It's not clear that Hamas will accept that. And there may be pushback on this point.

The maps are one of those sensitive issues on which this could all fall apart.

Another one, for example, is disarmament. Hamas made no mention of disarmament in their response to the proposal on Friday night. And yet that's a clear condition and requirement of Trump's proposal.

So there are issues upon which all of the optimism that we're seeing, all of the demands from the hostage families, from Israelis and Palestinians, that could still not be enough to get to the point where there's willingness to get this over the line.

President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are clearly trying to signal that they're on the same page. Trump's endorsement of Israel's withdrawal map, which clearly favors Israel, is very much an indication of that. They have -- they have spoken.

But there have been cracks here, frankly. When Hamas issued their initial response on Friday night, Netanyahu was surprised twice, according to an Israeli source.

First, when Trump hailed it as victory, saying they had agreed to the proposal even though it was very much a "yes, but" and they were conditions in final negotiations.

And second, when Trump demanded that Israel stop bombing Gaza. That came as a surprise to the Israelis and forced them to very much scale back the assault that we've seen on the battered territory.

So there have been cracks here, Manu, and we may see those emerge again throughout these talks, which they're both pushing to do as quickly as possible.

RAJU: All right. Oren Liebermann, thank you so much for breaking that down for us live from Jerusalem.

My panel is back with me now.

So, of course, this is now two years since October 7th. So how does the American public view what is happening right now?

[08:34:46]

RAJU: We've seen a sharp uptick in concern about what the Israel military operation against Hamas.

The question was put by Pew -- is it going too far? Up 12 points from December 2023 until now, September 2025. And Democrats and Republicans both view it that way.

What are -- you talk to the people in the White House -- what are you hearing about where they see this headed?

JASMINE WRIGHT, NOTUS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, the White House says that President Trump wants this over. And I think you can see that by his eagerness to come out and make the discussion seem like a very positive thing, which they are.

It is significant movement from where we were just a few months ago, even if potentially it doesn't end where everybody wants it to be.

Certainly, the White House has spent a lot of time trying to negotiate this type of ceasefire. They've committed significant resources, including Steve Witkoff and now Jared Kushner is getting involved. Obviously, he was at the White House when this announcement happened on Monday.

But they don't have a crystal ball. They can't tell you exactly where this is going. Fundamentally, though, they believe that there is progress happening in the right direction. And they believe that it is because of Donald Trump, that this would not be able to happen without Donald Trump.

And so he's going to continue pushing as far as he can. The question is where it lands.

RAJU: And among that in that same poll, Republican voters -- increasing number of Republican voters -- view this as Israel going too far.

It's still 19 percent of Republicans, but that's up about seven points since December 2023. Democrats much higher 15-point jump among Republicans -- Democrats who are concerned about the Israeli operation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But that's the trend, right, that there has been an increasing concern among the voters in the U.S. about the direction of this. And also Israel going too far.

And to Jasmine's point, the president himself is going to see how far he can push it to get this deal done. But which has constantly, consistently been the case with any of these discussions, is that there are always caveats.

And as Oren laid out very concisely, there are also cracks that are already showing. So it really -- having covered the Biden White House when this was also a discussion, it really isn't a deal until it is actually there.

And so we'll have to see how that plays out in the next few hours.

RAJU: And to Oren's point, I mean, Trump is just trying to cheerlead this into a deal, saying we've reached a deal or suggesting a deal is there before there's --

(CROSSTALKING)

JOHN BRESNAHAN, PUNCHBOWL NEWS CO-FOUNDER: But it's a smart move by Trump. He's trying to --

RAJU: Pressure them.

BRESNAHAN: Yes, he's trying to outflank Netanyahu on this. I think on the Hill, everybody is watching very closely. I think, you know, it's horrific that we're two years into this now.

I do think -- you're talking about polling, what's changed in Republicans. Surprised how long it's taken this but --

RAJU: Yes.

BRESNAHAN: -- young Republicans especially are moving away from Israel, which is scary.

And you know, I -- we'll just have to see how far Trump can go this week and whether he can bring this together.

RAJU: Yes, we shall see. And you're right, there's been a shift among -- generational divide in Israel has really been something to see.

All right.

Next, they're back. The Supreme Court begins a brand-new term tomorrow. So what's on the docket? Only a set of cases that could actually completely reshape Trump's agenda and impact the country for many years to come. That's next.

[08:37:58]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: A momentous Supreme Court term begins tomorrow. At stake: hugely significant cases that could test the power of Donald Trump's presidency. And it follows an unusually contentious summer, as the justices were flooded with a record number of emergency appeals from the White House weighing in on immigration, foreign aid and who Trump can fire, and often siding with the president.

So what does that mean for this term? For that, I'm joined now by CNN's chief Supreme Court analyst, Joan

Biskupic, to help break this all down.

Joan, I'm so glad you're here because you know this stuff better than pretty much anybody.

So we're beginning the term tomorrow. What are you watching?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Well, first of all, in this first sitting in October, we have a really good Voting Rights Act case that would be important for your viewers, especially.

It tests just how broadly the 1965 Voting Rights Act will be applied, when states have been found to have discriminated against Black or Hispanic voters in drawing redistricting maps, you know, drawing boundaries that diluted the power of their votes.

And whether as a remedy, states would then be forced to draw what are known as majority-minority districts, you know, where they at least consolidate Blacks or Hispanics to give them a chance to elect the candidates of their choice.

So there's some tension there between the protections of the 1965 Voting Rights Act and the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. So that comes up this month.

RAJU: Huge impact, huge implications for the midterms.

BISKUPIC: Definitely for 2026 and beyond.

And then in November, we have a test of President Trump's tariffs. That's, you know, the tariffs that date back to April and his so- called "liberation day" and just whether he exceeded his power in doing those.

That's going to be closely watched. And the justices fast tracked that because of the billions of dollars at stake.

And then in December and January, they're hearing two separate cases that will test his power to remove the heads of independent agencies, including with repercussions for the Federal Reserve, which, you know, he's been heavily pressuring.

RAJU: So if he wins on those --

BISKUPIC: Yes.

RAJU: -- he could have more say on the economy. It could -- if he loses on the tariffs, it could have such a huge impact on economic policy as well.

[08:44:50]

RAJU: So just such a momentous moment here. And it comes at this time of tension between the justices really. Have you ever seen this much tension among justices before? BISKUPIC: Well, not in my time. But it's happened before, you know,

like, you know, there used to be, you know, the old phrase "nine scorpions in a bottle", you know.

So they have historically had their bad moments. But this current bench is so divided, and in part it's because of, I think, our polarized times and the way that, you know, the three Trump justices came in and sort of energized the right wing in a way that's only really pitted the two sides at each other.

Back in the day, when I first started covering the court, it would be rare for me to even note the president, who had appointed a justice or a judge, you know, who was ruling. But now it's so relevant because of how carefully both sides have made their nominations to the court.

And, you know, I think -- I think what we saw through the summer is they heard those cases over, you know, you mentioned it at the top of the show. You know, deportations, federal funds, firings, the you know, grant money, every -- you name it.

They had those cases come up and usually, Manu, they have a pretty good, restful, restorative summer. It was not a restful summer.

And I think we have a comment that Justice Sonia Sotomayor said at one point that reflects the divisions and how the liberal justices are so certain that the default mode of the conservatives is always rule for them.

And she said today's order clarifies only one thing. Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial.

RAJU: You don't usually see that.

BIKUSPIC: I know.

No. And you can imagine that did not make her conservative colleagues happy.

RAJU: No, I can imagine it.

BIKUSPIC: Yes.

RAJU: You know, and you've literally written the book about John Roberts, the chief justice, and you had a story recently about how the Roberts court became the Trump court.

He's now 20 years as chief, which is unbelievable. I remember when he got confirmed. Are you surprised that he has given Trump so much latitude?

BIKUSPIC: Well, you know, think of how much the court has changed. He already came in very conservative. He was a Reagan conservative, so he already came in that way.

But he was -- he was somebody who could at times gravitate toward the center. Remember he cast a key vote to save Obamacare in 2012.

And he's always been a little bit more institution-minded to try to protect the integrity of the bench.

But now he has five right-wing justices on the other side of him. And I think he's in -- his mode of operation is sort of if I can't beat him, if I can't compromise with him, I better join him, because then he can at least control the opinions.

But he has gone very far, as you know, just a year ago, with the immunity ruling, giving -- giving Donald Trump essentially a blank check to do what he's doing right now with his many policies.

So I'm surprised -- I'm surprised that he's dug in so far on the right wing but, you know --

(CROSSTALKING)

RAJU: Do you expect him to in this term as well?

BIKUSPIC: Well, I think I think he's very aware of the criticism of the court these days. He's somebody who, you know, understands that the court is, the court is supposed to remove itself from politics and right now it's so embroiled in politics.

I could see him trying to at least, maybe pull another justice over more toward the center to at least look like it's trying to reach some sort of more balanced set of rulings.

But, you know, it's kind of like what I've always -- the Obamacare decision. We felt that we could take that further into his -- into his tenure. But now I'm wondering if basically that chapter of his life is over.

And now, as I say, if he can't beat them, join them on the right wing.

(CROSSTALKING)

RAJU: Is he aware of the polls that have just been brutal about the Supreme Court. Just how confident are you in the judicial branch Supreme Court, a Gallup poll recently, just 16 percent of the American public. That's stunning.

BIKUSPIC: It is. And what he what he says is that they tune it out. They're here to decide the law. But I think -- I think you're going to see more statements and opinions or in public statements on the stump where they try to explain themselves a little bit more to potentially inspire some confidence.

RAJU: Yes. Because, I mean, the Supreme Court is a black box, as you know --

BIKUSPIC: Yes. Right.

RAJU: -- more than any other institutions.

All right. Joan, so great to see you. Thank you so much for coming on.

BIKUSPIC: Sure.

RAJU: Your expertise is invaluable.

All right. Coming up, can the U.S. Mint issue a $1 Trump coin that looks like this? We have new details. That's next.

[08:49:27]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: Topping our political radar this week, former FBI director James Comey is scheduled to be arraigned this Thursday at a federal court in Alexandria, Virginia just outside of Washington.

Now, Comey was charged with giving false statements and obstruction of a congressional proceeding. But new this weekend, a source tells CNN that the FBI had been planning an early morning surrender for Comey on the day his indictment was unsealed. But that one agent was disciplined for refusing to take part.

Now take a look at these images that circulated online this week. They're drafts of a commemorative $1 coin the U.S. Mint could issue in honor of America's 250th birthday next year.

It's not clear it will be minted, though, because it is against U.S. law to display the image of a sitting or living former president.

[08:54:52]

RAJU: In fact, presidents cannot be featured on a coin no sooner than two years after their death. And that's according to the U.S. Code governing design.

Still, the U.S. Treasurer confirmed the authenticity of the images, writing on X, quote, "No fake news here. These first drafts, honoring America's 250th birthday and POTUS are real."

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. You can follow me on X @mkraju. Follow the show @INSIDE POLITICS, and you can also find me on TikTok and Instagram.

If you ever miss an episode, just catch up wherever you get your podcasts and search for INSIDE POLITICS.

Up next "STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER AND DANA BASH". Jake's exclusive with President Trump on the potential Gaza ceasefire deal. His guests also include Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett and Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego.

And later today, the brand-new "CNN ORIGINAL SERIES: TONY SHALHOUB BREAKING BREAD" premiers. Tony Shalhoub takes a trip around the world to discover how bread connects us. That's tonight at 9:00 on CNN.

Thanks again for sharing your Sunday morning with us. We'll see you next time.

[08:55:55]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)