Return to Transcripts main page
One World with Zain Asher
Court Blocks Trump From Imposing The Bulk Of His Tariffs; Judge To Bar Trump From Pulling Harvard's Student Visa Access; Glacier Collapse Leaves Swiss Village Buried By Mud And Rock; CNN Examines Backup Systems For Ground Control Failures; Concerns Over U.S. Changes To COVID Vaccine Recommendations; Reality T.V. Stars The Chrisleys Released From Prison; Aired 12-1p ET
Aired May 29, 2025 - 12:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[12:00:16]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: The Trump administration rocks an already shaky relationship with China. "ONE WORLD" starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you hoping to pull back your tariffs in order to get China to the negotiating table?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Trump ratchets up his trade war with China despite some significant new roadblocks.
Also ahead, the video that everyone is talking about. See the aftermath of a glacier collapse in Switzerland. What happened down below and how it's
all related to, you guessed it, climate change. That's later in the show.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FORREST SANDERS, NEWS CHANNEL 5 REPORTER: Is this the earliest known picture of the two of you?
ETHAN HIll, MUSICIAN: I think so probably.
TY HENRY, MUSICIAN: This is goofing off in class and making our teachers mad.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: And it's their senior year and they've been through everything together. How the twosome is going out now with a bang.
Hello, everyone. Live from New York, I'm Bianna Golodryga. Zain is off today. You're watching the second hour of "ONE WORLD."
Federal Court has blocked most of President Trump's sweeping tariffs on America's biggest trading partners. The three-judge panel ruled that the
president overstepped his authority when he imposed the tariffs under emergency powers.
Twelve states and five businesses who say they were harmed by the tariffs filed lawsuits. For its part, the Trump administration says it will appeal
the decision. On Wednesday, President Trump defended his tariff strategy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Wall Street analysts have coined a new term called the TACO trade. They're saying Trump always chickens out on your tariff threats
and that's why markets are higher this week. What's your response to that?
TRUMP: I kick out?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Chicken out.
TRUMP Oh, and then I chicken out. I've never heard of that. You mean because I reduced China from 145 percent that I set down to 100 and then
down to another number?
Because I -- I gave the European Union a 50 percent tax tariff? And they called up and they said, please, let's meet right now.
We had a country of people didn't think it was going to survive and you asked a nasty question like that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Matt Egan joins us with a closer look at the decision. Not -- not the TACO acronym, Trump Always Chickens Out. We can get to that another
time clearly. That really bothered the president when he heard it though.
But, Matt, let's specifically stick with this ruling, because it impacts the reciprocal liberation day tariffs that were unveiled April 2nd, as well
as fentanyl tariffs. The tariffs on specific sectors, those stay in place. So walk us through the reaction thus far.
MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Well, Bianna, this is a very big deal because it does blow a hole in a central part of the president's economic agenda. Of
course, that is his extremely aggressive use of tariffs.
Now, this ruling did set off a mini celebration in financial markets last night. But when we look at how markets are reacting today, you can see a
lot of that initial enthusiasm has kind of faded here. You see the Dow is solidly lower. That's mostly because of one stock.
But even the S&P 500 is now a little bit in the red and the NASDAQ is basically flat on the day. Initially, we saw a lot of the tariff exposed
stocks move significantly higher including Apple, Target, Nike, Crocs, Wayfair. But again, all of them have reversed and in fact most of them are
now in the red.
So when we look at this ruling, this came from a little known court in Manhattan, the U.S. court of international trade. And essentially, they
ruled that the president overstepped here with his use of emergency powers, right?
They said that these worldwide and retaliatory tariff orders exceed any authority granted to the president by IEEPA. That is the emergency powers
act that he was invoking.
Now, as far as what is impacted here and what's not, the big things are those 10 percent universal tariffs that is impacted here, right? As well as
the 25 percent limited tariffs on Canada and Mexico and the 30 percent tariff on China.
But there are other tariffs here that are not impacted by this court ruling including the tariffs on autos, auto parts, steel, aluminum.
And there's also a number of investigations underway over potential tariffs on critical minerals, copper, lumber, semi-conductors, pharmaceuticals.
None of those would be impacted by this ruling.
Now, as you note, the White House has already appealed here. And some analysts do think that this case could end up in the Supreme Court. And the
president does have other legal authorities that he could rely on. So it's important to note that this does not mean that tariffs are going away
completely.
[12:05:03]
And I talked to Ernie Tedeschi over at The Budget Lab at Yale and he said, if anything, this ruling supercharges the uncertainty, already facing
businesses and consumers, because it's the first hint of a possibility that tariffs could be eliminated entirely.
And so I do think it is that uncertainty that could be weighing on financial markets today, because really, at the end of the day, Bianna, I
think the bottom line is, this may end up being more of a detour than a death knell to the trade war, right? It may end up just looking a little
bit different than it did a few days ago.
And in the meantime, again, this just adds to the uncertainty for investors, small business owners, and CEOs, and they're already dealing
with a lot of uncertainty.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. The U.S. Court of International Trade may not be widely known and familiar to most Americans, but it has rather broad jurisdiction,
as we found out from their ruling.
Matt Egan, thank you so much.
EGAN: Thanks, Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: We're joined now by Ilya Somin. He is considered one of the prime movers behind this case. He's with the D.C. Think Tank, the Cato
Institute. And he's also a law professor at George Mason University just outside of Washington. Ilya, it's great to have you on the show.
So shortly after this decision last night, you wrote in a piece for Reason Magazine titled, all caps, "WE WON OUR TARIFF CASE!"
And you go on to say, from the very beginning, I have contended that the virtually limitless nature of the authority claimed by Trump is a key
reason why courts must strike down the tariffs.
You're essentially calling this a power grab by the president, and the judges appear to agree with your assessment.
Here's what they stated in their decision. Because of the Constitution's expressed allocation of the tariff power to Congress, we do not read IEEPA
to delegate an unbounded tariff authority to the president. The statute requires that any emergency action address an unusual or extraordinary
threat, which the court determined persistent trade deficits do not meet.
So, what evidence do you think ultimately convinced these judges to come to this conclusion?
ILYA SOMIN, LAW PROFESSOR, GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY: I think the evidence to convince them is that the president is claiming an unlimited power to
compose any tariff he wants on any country for any reason, any time he feels like it. That power is not granted by the statute he was relying on.
And as the court pointed out, if a statute did grant that power, it would actually be unconstitutional. Because the Constitution gives Congress, not
the president, the power to set tariffs. And it can't simply make a completely boundless and unlimited delegation of that power.
Essentially, the president here is trying to act like a king. And our constitution does not allow him to do that.
GOLODRYGA: The states in this case were asking for a preliminary injunction. And the court seemed to have gone even further by making a
permanent injunction here. And also making a decision, it appears, on the merits of the case itself. Did that surprise you?
SOMIN: No. Our clients, the five businesses, had asked for a permanent injunction, as well as a preliminary injunction. I believe, actually, the
states did as well. That would have to check the record based on the exclusion --
GOLODRYGA: No. I actually --
SOMIN: -- and indefensible.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. Well, one of the attorney generals from one of the two states said that -- that I'm actually quoting her from Arizona, I believe,
saying that this was a surprise to her because this isn't -- they weren't asking for a permanent --
SOMIN: OK. Still --
GOLODRYGA: -- injunction. It's temporary.
SOMIN: So we did ask for a permanent injunction, as well as a temporary one that would have been an alternative. And that was granted in our case and
in the other one, as well. And as the court pointed out, there was every reason to just make a ruling on the merits here, because there -- there's
little, if anything, in the way of disputed facts and all the legal issues involved there clear.
GOLODRYGA: The White House was quick to call this a judicial coup, and already stated that they are going to appeal this decision. It is worth
noting, as you have already in your paper, that among these three judges, they were appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents, one of
them by President Trump himself.
This court has invoked the major questions doctrine. And that was a doctrine that was also used to -- to rule against President Biden's
executive order to forgive student debt.
Can you explain what that signals in terms of a -- a counter to the president claiming that this is a judicial coup?
SOMIN: Yes. The only coup here is the president trying to act like a king and usurp a power that actually belongs to Congress and not to him.
The major questions doctrine, which you mentioned, and which the court part we relied on, says that when the executive claims that some power over
issues of vast economic or political significance has been delegated to it by Congress, that at the very least, that delegation has to be very clear
on the face of the law.
[12:10:13]
There's nothing, at all, clear about the vast delegation of power the president is claiming here. The statute is relying on doesn't even mention
tariffs. And in addition, it says that if the statute is going to be invoked at all, it has to be for an emergency, and only for an emergency
involving an extraordinary and unusual threat to the U.S. economy or security.
The supposed emergency here is trade deficits. There's nothing extraordinary or unusual about them at all. They happen all the time, and
they're not a threat at all.
I have a trade deficit with my local supermarket. I buy much more from them than they ever buy from me. But that's not extraordinary or unusual or a
threat. And the same thing, if we have a trade deficit with certain countries where we may buy more goods from them than they from us.
And I would add that these tariffs were so sweeping that he was even imposing on countries that we have a trade surplus with and ones that
impose no tariffs whatsoever on American goods such as Switzerland and Israel.
So there's no extraordinary unusual threat here. There's no emergency. It's always bogus claim and a power grab by the administration.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And we should note that sectorial tariffs do remain in place. And these are the 25 percent levies against metal and automobile
imports. And it doesn't forestall future tariffs on pharmaceuticals, for example, and semiconductors that the president has threatened as well.
Nonetheless, this is a -- a huge blow to one of the president's signature policies. And we will see how the appellate court then handles this.
Ilya Somin, thank you so much for the time.
SOMIN: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Well, Beijing reacted to that trade court ruling by reiterating what it has said before, that there are no winners in Trump's trade war.
But now, there are two new blows that could further strain U.S.-China relations.
The Trump administration recently ordered some U.S. companies to stop selling software used to design semiconductors to China, this according to
"The Financial Times."
But it was the second blow that had China firing back Trump's plan to revoke visas for hundreds of thousands of Chinese students.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAO NING, SPOKESWOMAN, CHINESE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: This politically motivated and discriminatory action exposes the lie of the so-
called freedom and openness that the U.S. has long claimed and will only further harm the U.S. international image and national credibility.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Harvard University got a big win in court today, but meantime, in its battle with Donald Trump. A judge is set to put in place a broad
injunction that will bar the Trump administration from stripping Harvard's access to the student visa program.
But that could just be a temporary reprieve because the Trump administration has begun the formal process of revoking Harvard's access to
that program. Harvard now has 30 days to respond to allegations that the school has created an unsafe atmosphere for Jewish students.
At the same time, Harvard is celebrating its graduation today.
Students gave a one-minute standing ovation to the school's president as he opened the ceremonies.
CNN's chief legal affairs correspondent Paula Reid is in Washington for us. And this decision coming from the judge just moments ago. Explain to us
exactly what it means.
PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: So, Bianna, for now, international students can continue to come to Harvard. At the center of
this case and this hearing today was an attempt by the administration to revoke the school's student visa program.
And that would -- that would potentially imperil its ability to have international students at the school because if you come here from another
country to attend a school, you have to attend one that has a valid student visa program.
The university has argued that this is a violation of its constitutional rights, including a free speech.
Now, it's interesting. This is such a high-stakes hearing and it was almost, almost derailed late last night when the Justice Department filed a
notice to the university, telling them that they were going to begin this effort. And that kicked off a 30-day period for the school to respond to
allegations from the administration. And that's the kind of procedural stuff that happens in federal court that can delay or even derail a
hearing.
But today in court, this federal judge was not having it. She said she did not want to continue this or delay it and leave this larger question open.
So she said she would continue a temporary pause on this plan and she said, quote, I want to maintain the status quo.
So she is asking the two sides to hash out a permanent pause. She said it, quote, it doesn't need to be draconian, but I want to make sure it's worded
in a way so that nothing changes.
Now, this pause is expected to remain in effect until whatever final court this question reaches decides whether this policy is constitutional or not.
[12:15:04]
And, Bianna, as you know, this is one of just many legal battles brewing between the administration and the university over everything from federal
funding to DEI.
GOLODRYGA: It's hard to keep track of how many -- how much litigation is going on between these two sides at this point.
Paula Reid, thank you so much.
Well, with Harvard in focus, we want to know how Americans are feeling about elite universities. Our Harry Enten joins us to break it down.
If I were to guess, Harry, and you're the expert here, this is having a real impact on how Americans are -- are feeling about some of the -- the
top notch, I guess elite schools in this country, the Ivy Leagues. And that's most likely a negative effect, no?
HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Yes. I mean, I -- I think we really should take those sort of long view here, Bianna, and just sort of note
that high confidence in higher education has been falling through the floor. I get a little exercise in there.
I want you to take a look at the long-term trend high confidence in higher education. You go back a decade ago, it was 57 percent. You can rarely get
57 percent of this country degree on anything these days, but they did agree that they had high confidence in higher education.
By last year, look at this. Before even any of this started, it was already down, way down to just 36 percent. That's a 21-point drop in just a decade
among Republicans that drop was even more dramatic, dropping from 50, get this 56 percent to just 20 percent of Republicans who have a high amount of
confidence in higher education. And get this, 68 percent of Americans said that higher education was on the wrong track.
Now, you might ask yourself, OK, why is it that Americans feel that higher education is on the wrong track? Why is it that, especially among
Republicans, that number has plummeted so much?
Well, of course, Republicans and conservatives have been charging that elite institutions such as Harvard, they're biased. They're biased against
conservatives, right?
So let's take a look here. Do in fact, colleges have a liberal bias. Get this, 45 percent the plurality overall agree. Just 24 percent of Americans
disagree with that idea.
And among Republicans, look at how sky high, that percentage is 67 percent agree with the idea that colleges have a liberal bias, just seven percent.
Just seven percent. That's basically the number of Republicans who voted for Kamala Harris last year.
Disagree with the idea that colleges have a liberal bias. And this has been true in basically all the polls that I sort of look at, right? They ask
different ways, but they all basically agree that if anything, colleges have a liberal bias and that they are biased against conservatives.
Now, you know, we have these numbers on the board and we're talking about American politics. But, of course, what this could have the greatest impact
on is international students, right? Whether or not they actually show up and actually want to come to this country and whether or not they can
affect study in this country.
And this to me is one of these leading indicators. I'm going to be really interested to see how it turns out. So this is web page views for U.S.
university courses. And this is from abroad, right? And we're going to look at the change from January 5th to the end of April.
And get this searches for U.S. courses from international -- potential international students way down there. Look at that down 50 percent, only
over the last few months since Donald Trump took office.
So if Donald Trump's idea here was to hurt elite institutions and makes international students want to come here less, well, then it does seem like
mission accomplished. Of course, we're just going to have to wait and see.
But when we look at all of this, it's no doubt about it that there are a lot of Americans, even if they disagree with the tactics that Donald Trump
might use, they do agree with the idea that higher education needs a nice kick in the rear end.
GOLODRYGA: Listen, this may be a momentary feeling of relief for -- for some Americans, but all the experts say longer term, this only ends up
hurting America and its competitiveness globally, its stature as the world's leading higher education source. A number of domino effects here,
given some of these measures the president is insistent on.
Harry Enten, we'll be following it all. It's good to see you, my friend.
ENTEN: It's nice to see you. Maybe next time around we could do a little bit more of a fun segment, maybe.
GOLODRYGA: I -- I literally blame it on our producers. I'm told to wrap right now. Otherwise, I was planning on talking to you about our favorite
movies.
ENTEN: Those producers, whatever.
GOLODRYGA: But that'll -- that'll be tomorrow. Don't think it's when Zain's not here that we don't have fun. I was in for fun.
ENTEN: OK. OK. All right. Fine, fine.
GOLODRYGA: Just listening to the bosses. All right. Bye, Harry.
All right. Coming up, the Trump administration just terminated funding from Moderna to develop a bird flu vaccine. How this and other vaccine related
changes could affect you.
Plus, dramatic video out of Switzerland where a massive chunk of a glacier broke off the Swiss Alps leaving destruction in its wake. Can we expect
more of these types of disasters? We'll discuss ahead.
Also ahead --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN DUFFY, U.S. TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: We are going to, in essence, gut the air traffic control system.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Plagued with problems, America's air traffic control system is in need of an overhaul. CNN shows you what it looks like from a pilot's
perspective when things go wrong on the ground.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:20:36]
GOLODRYGA: Dramatic video out of Switzerland where a chunk of glacier broke off the Swiss Alps partially bearing the small village of Blatten.
The video shot by Pomona Media shows the moment the glacier begins sliding down the slopes of the mountain, bringing massive amounts of mud and debris
with it. Just look at that.
Joining us now is CNN climate correspondent Bill Weir. Again, having you on of all of our correspondents, Bill, gives us a sense of -- of what is going
on here. Explain to us about what happened and the role that climate change apparently has.
BILL WEIR, CNN CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Bianna, it's -- it's too soon to tell exactly what contributed to the collapse that we just watched in
dramatic fashion. Right now, this town of about village of 300 people almost completely devastated. One man missing.
Luckily, geologists had noticed changes to the rocks above that particular glacier. They were piling. There was a crack. And over the last 15 years,
locals say the permafrost that was holding up a big rock face had degraded. The glacier itself shrinks. And this is the result.
We have before and after satellite photos to show how it's completely wiped out. And now flooding is the problem for what's left there because all that
debris blocks the river, the water backs up here as well.
But this is a warning, folks. There are some estimated 15 million people around the world living below glacier lakes. Glacier lake outbursts floods
or GLOFs are a real threat, especially in the Himalayas. They've happened in the Andes. They can see what's happening in Europe right here.
But this is a rich western country, Switzerland, that had the foresight to get people out of the way. You've got to worry about more vulnerable places
that have these dripping time bombs above them.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, no doubt. I mean, thank goodness for those geologists. As you noted, Switzerland, a rich country, and they were forewarned. But think
about all of the millions of people around the world that could find themselves in a similar predicament without such a warning.
Bill Weir, always good to see you. Thank you.
WEIR: You bet.
GOLODRYGA: Well, Newark, New Jersey's Liberty University International Airport is one of the busiest U.S. airports, and its recent problems are
considered red flags across the U.S. aviation system. The U.S. Transportation Secretary says the air traffic control system needs to be
fixed.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DUFFY: We have an antiquated, an old air traffic control system anywhere from 25, 35, 40 years old in some places. It is in desperate need of a
brand-new build.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[12:25:12]
GOLODRYGA: Now to give you an idea of what happens when aircraft systems go wrong, our Pete Muntean goes inside a cockpit to share a pilot's
perspective.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Ready to go.
I'm at the controls of a Boeing 737 Max simulator here at United Airlines Flight Training Center in Denver, to see what pilots experience when air
traffic control goes dark.
It's the latest challenge for them after flights in and out of Newark faced repeat failures of radar and radio earlier this month.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We don't have a radar, so I don't know where you are.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): Along with me is Capt. Miles Morgan, who heads training for United.
MUNTEAN: Would you say that these issues at Newark have caused any sort of degradation of safety?
CAPT. MILES MORGAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR FLIGHT TRAINING, UNITED AIRLINES: Not at all. Safety for us, if you've got pilots that are operating into the
airspace, it is safe for us to do so. We are 100 percent confident of that.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): This is some of the busiest airspace in the country. If air traffic controllers lose their radar scopes --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Traffic, traffic.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): -- Morgan says pilots can fall back on the plane's Traffic Collision Avoidance System or TCAS. It calls out collisions in the
making and can even issue instructions to climb or descend.
MORGAN: That was traffic. So now, OK, I've stopped doing what I'm doing. I look, I see it on the screen 700 feet above. I acquire it visually and now
I'm monitoring. I'm making sure, hey, this is good. I'm -- we're at -- we're at a good airspace. We're safe.
MUNTEAN: The reason you're showing me this is to show that there are other layers here. There are other systems.
MORGAN: Exactly correct. We have a lot of different layers, and a lot of them rely on the external world. But we all have this internal system that
our airplanes will talk to each other.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): But when controllers can't reach flights via radio, Morgan says pilots would try a previously used radio frequency.
MORGAN: Push this button. The previous frequency pops back up.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): Try the emergency backup frequency.
MORGAN: This would be a -- a backup if we couldn't raise it any other way.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): Use data link text messaging to communicate with the airline.
MORGAN: And I can say "need frequency." And I --
MUNTEAN (voice-over): And dial in a transponder code that signals the communication has been lost. Decades old redundancies that air traffic
controllers are trained for too.
NICK DANIELS, PRESIDENT, U.S. NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION: We're always prepared for it. The pilots are always prepared for it.
Unfortunately, we're having to use those safety nets.
MORGAN: So I'm going to start putting some flaps in for you.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): Maybe to prove that flying is safe, Morgan, even let me do the landing.
MORGAN: A little flair. Perfect. Boom.
MUNTEAN (voice-over): Not my worst. As airlines insist, the worst will not happen when air traffic control fails.
MORGAN: I don't really worry when something is a little abnormal. We're trained for all these abnormalities. It's not just this. It's -- we're
constantly training for whatever could be going wrong and how to make a decision to rectify that.
MUNTEAN: This is especially pertinent since Newark is one of United's biggest hubs. And the FAA has scaled back flights there in order to not
overwhelm air traffic control. United says that actually led to it canceling no flights on Memorial Day or the day before transportation
secretary Sean Duffy said Wednesday, that the federal government has taken steps to harden Newark air traffic control systems, but even still there
needs to be a nationwide overhaul of air traffic control. He says something that could cost tens of billions of dollars.
Pete Muntean, CNN, Reagan National Airport.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Pete Muntean for that really eye-opening report.
Still to come for us. The U.S. says it will stop recommending the COVID shot for pregnant women and healthy children. We'll look at the impacts of
this controversial move, ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:30:23]
GOLODRYGA: Welcome back to "ONE WORLD." I'm Bianna Golodryga.
The Trump administration has canceled nearly $600 million in funding for a bird flu vaccine. The Biden administration had previously contracted with
drug maker, Moderna, to develop a vaccine to protect against the disease.
After review, Health and Human Services said, continued investment in the vaccine was, quote, not scientifically or ethically justifiable.
Now, the medical community is pushing back against an announcement already made earlier this week by U.S. health officials.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT KENNEDY JR., U.S. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY: Last year, the Biden administration urged healthy children to get yet another COVID
shot despite the lack of any clinical data to support the repeat booster strategy in children.
JAY BHATTACHARYA, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH OF THE UNITED STATES: That ends today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: The government now says the COVID-19 vaccine will no longer be recommended for healthy children and pregnant women. The officials offered
no scientific proof to justify the policy change. Now, the move could affect millions of Americans' access to the shots as well.
Time now for "The Exchange." Joining me from Atlanta is Dr. Carlos Del Rio, Executive Associate Dean of Emory University School of Medicine at Grady
Health System. Doctor, it's good to see you.
So your reaction to this new policy where it is now longer recommended that healthy pregnant women and children get a COVID vaccine. Is there any
scientific evidence to back this up? Because what we're hearing from officials is that, quote, this is common sense and good science.
DR. CARLOS DEL RIO, EXECUTIVE ASSOCIATE DEAN, EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: Well, thanks, Bianna. No, unfortunately, when I heard this, I was
both shocked and upset. And I'm shocked because the evidence is very clear. There is -- there is evidence in the literature and there is evidence from
well-done scientific studies that vaccinating pregnant women, not only decreases the risk of that pregnant women catching COVID, but it decreases
by about 60 percent, but it decreases the risk of that pregnant woman, if she gets COVID, ended up in the hospital and having severe disease by about
90 percent.
Furthermore, vaccinating that mother protects the infant by giving the infant antibodies. And infants under six months are a high-risk of COVID,
yet, they are -- they are not eligible for vaccination.
So clearly, the data is there. The science is there. And this recommendation did not follow any science whatsoever.
But I'm also upset because the CDC has a committee called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice, or also known as the ACIP, which is
formed by very, very respected experts in the field of vaccinology.
[12:35:02]
And the members of the ACIP make recommendations based on science, which are then submitted to the CDC director and to the HHS secretary. And that's
how we should use, that's how we should develop recommendations.
It should not be a decision made by the HHS secretary without absence of experts giving the information, the necessary information and
recommendation. So the lack of that is also very upsetting and something that many of us are concerned about.
GOLODRYGA: So, what are the implications of bypassing this typical advisory committee process? Because just from observation standpoint, given what the
HHS secretary's known views on vaccines and his skepticism in the past, one could interpret it as them not wanting to hear what likely they would have
heard from this committee, and that is that this would not be an advisable decision.
How do you interpret it?
DEL RIO: Well, I think that -- I think you're correct. And I -- you know, again, I'm not going to speculate, but clearly, the -- the process was not
taken into consideration. The voice of experts were not taken into consideration.
And I must say that, you know, the secretary of HHS is not an expert in vaccine. And in fact, we know what his stance on vaccines are. We know that
he, you know, he himself had lawsuits that he -- he put against companies for vaccinating children, for vaccinating pregnant women.
So he is using his position as secretary to advance his own personal interests and not necessarily advancing the science. And again, at the end
of the day, I want to see pregnant women. I want to see young children be protected from COVID.
And this is unfortunate because the fact that this has been dropped from the CDC recommendations, I think makes absolutely no sense.
GOLODRYGA: So, what is your advice then for parents and for pregnant women who may be confused understandably about what they should do? And also,
whether or not they would have the same type of access to vaccines that they did prior to this recommendation?
DEL RIO: Well, my -- my first advice is that, you know, pregnant women and -- and -- and parents should discuss it with their -- with their providers,
with their physicians, and get the advice from them.
They also, you know, do their -- don't do their own research. I mean, you can go and find the literature and see what the literature said. But do it
from respectable sources and from trusted sources and follow the science.
But what I'm worried about is what you mentioned is the access, right? If it's -- if the vaccine is not recommended, will insurance companies with
payers then pay for it if a pregnant woman wants it?
And unfortunately, the price of those vaccines right now is pretty high. These vaccines, if you don't have coverage, you know, we're talking about
$100 or more. And most people would not be able to afford it.
And again, those of us who worked as clinicians during the COVID times can recall the number of young individuals of pregnant women and of other
individuals we saw in ICUs and critically ill as a result of COVID.
I don't want to see that again. We have vaccines that are available. And I hope this recommendation changes.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. None of us want to see that again, Doctor.
If I could get you to weigh in on this decision now to cancel more than $700 million of funding for Moderna for the bird flu vaccine. Your reaction
to that?
DEL RIO: Well, again, I -- I don't understand it. I -- it makes no sense to me. Moderna has been proven to produce vaccines. I have -- I don't have any
financial interest in them. I don't own any of the stocks, but I've seen the work. I was an investigator on the -- on the Moderna trial of the COVID
vaccine.
And I -- I saw how they work. I saw how professional they are, how committed to science they are, how committed to the welfare of participants
and of patients that receive their products they are.
And I think if anybody could produce an effective vaccine against bird flu, it's them and the other people that are using technology, so mRNA.
Unfortunately, you know, the word mRNA has been weaponized by this administration. They believe that mRNA is a -- is a bad type of vaccine.
And I disagree with that. I think mRNA was actually the vaccine that saved us during COVID and has the potential of saving us also if we were to have
a bird flu outbreak.
So, I'm disappointed by this decision. And I just hope that we don't have a bird flu outbreak because at this point in time, we would not have somebody
working on a vaccine for that.
GOLODRYGA: You know, the lightning speed way that we were able, and this is under President Trump during his first term, to develop not one but two
vaccines during this deadly epidemic, I think just within a matter of months, typically, it takes years, also speaks to the amount of investment
and encouragement that was coming from not only private companies, but obviously from governments as well in the United States.
I would imagine it's no coincidence that these two companies were both American and funded by the U.S. government primarily.
If we're seeing this type of skepticism from officials now, what does that tell you or what are your concerns, if any, about the -- the -- the impact
that this will have on a company's drive to come up with these types of vaccines as soon as they did previously?
[12:40:02]
DEL RIO: Well, again, you know, first of all, let me just say that I -- I - - I'm eternally grateful and I recognize the leadership of President Trump during -- during the COVID outbreak. The fact that he actually committed to
Operation Warp Speed should be seen like a total success.
As you said, in -- in a record speed time, we had not one but two vaccines that proven to be effective and that saved millions of lives. And we should
always be thankful for that.
So I really don't understand why all of a sudden we don't like that approach because it proved to be effective. So it really it's -- it's --
it's absolutely makes -- makes no sense to me. And I wish we were -- we're working with this companies again.
This two are two American companies that work very hard to produce the vaccines. And I worry that, you know, when you -- when you take away the
funding like this, they will have to find other investors and other people interested in -- in doing this.
But I also worry that then companies outside the U.S., other companies that produce vaccines, will start producing the H flu -- H5N1 vaccine for
potential bird flu or for other vaccines. Because if we're going to run away from the mRNA technology in our country because we simply don't like
it, I think we're making a big error and that potentially can cost a lot of lives in the future.
GOLODRYGA: Doctor, we'll have to leave it there. Thank you so much for joining us.
And coming up, the U.S. president once again sends a very clear message, those who support him politically may not have to face the long arm of the
law.
Then --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SAVANNAH CHRISLEY, INFLUENCER: The president called me personally as I walking into Sam's Club and notified me that he was signing paper, pardon
paperwork for both of my parents.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Two high-profile recipients are back home with their family after being released from prison. We'll have much more when we return.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: U.S. President's largest campaign donor says that his time in the Trump administration has come to an end. Elon Musk, the tech
billionaire who was in charge of the White House team known as DOGE, has been stepping back from government in recent weeks to focus on his
struggling companies, SpaceX and Tesla.
Now, he announced his departure this coming after an interview where Musk criticized a budget bill backed by Donald Trump. DOGE, meanwhile, is poised
to continue its work.
While hours after Donald Trump was inaugurated for the second time, he issued a sweeping grant of clemency to each and every person charged in the
January 6 riots. It was one of his first official acts, and critics say it sent the message that those who have supported him politically won't be
held accountable for the crimes they commit.
[12:45:11]
The U.S. president recently issued a new series of pardons and commutations among them, former nursing home executive, Paul Walczak, who was convicted
of tax crimes.
"The New York Times" reports that the pardon came after his mother raised millions of dollars for Trump and other Republicans.
Former Republican Congressman, Michael Grimm, who served seven months for tax evasion a decade ago, was pardoned on Wednesday.
And Trump is now suggesting the men who conspired to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic Governor of Michigan, might be next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will you pardon the people who are accused of conspiring to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer?
TRUMP: I'm going to look at it. I will take a look at it. It's been brought to my attention. I did watch the trial. It looked to me like somewhat of a
railroad job. I'll be honest with you, it looked to me like some people said some stupid things, you know. They were drinking and I think they said
stupid things. But I'll take a look at that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: But it doesn't stop there. Reality TV stars Todd and Julie Chrisley were released from federal prison on Wednesday, a day after they
were pardoned.
CNN's Randi Kaye has the story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TODD CHRISLEY, AMERICAN TV PERSONALITY: We're the Chrisleys, Todd and Julie Chrisley. We live in a neighborhood north of Atlanta, a gated neighborhood
with celebrities here.
RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): When they rose to fame about a decade ago, Todd and Julie Chrisley billed themselves as self- made
religious real estate tycoons. Their mansion outside Atlanta was 30,000 square feet. They drove fancy cars and wore designer clothes.
The show chronicled it all, their lavish lifestyle, along with their business and family drama. There were spinoffs too, among them "Growing Up
Chrisley."
FAYE CHRISLEY, MOTHER OF TODD CHRISLEY: So, what you want to do?
SAVANNAH CHRISLEY, DAUGHTER OF TODD CHRISLEY: We need to get out of Nashville. Try a different city.
CHASE CHRISLEY, SON OF TODD CHRISLEY: I got to let my wings fly, you know.
S. CHRISLEY: If we're going to move, we need to move to somewhere that makes sense for both of our futures.
KAYE (voice-over): Despite their success, prosecutors say it was based on a lie. They were convicted in 2022 of bank fraud and tax fraud. Todd Chrisley
was sentenced to 12 years. His wife, Julie, sentenced to seven years. Their daughter, Savannah believed in her parents' innocence and continued to
fight for their release. That included embracing MAGA world and spending time at the White House in President Donald Trump's orbit.
Last year, Savannah posted this photo with President Trump. She also spoke at the Republican National Convention.
S. CHRISLEY: My family was persecuted by rogue prosecutors in Fulton County due to our public profile.
KAYE (voice-over): She also posted on Instagram after her visit to the White House in February, writing "I will never stop fighting for my
parents."
Last month, another visit to the White House, then came this moment about a week ago.
S. CHRISLEY: They referred to us as the Trumps of the South at trial. The prosecutors did. When I saw, obviously, what the president was going
through, what my family has gone through, it was very -- it was eerily similar.
KAYE (voice-over): That appearance on Lara Trump's show on Fox is what Savannah believes changed the course of her parents' lives.
S. CHRISLEY: I think that that episode of her show reminded the president of my family's story.
KAYE (voice-over): Then suddenly, yesterday, President Donald Trump announced he was pardoning Todd and Julie Chrisley.
TRUMP: Your parents are going to be free and clean, and I hope we can do it by tomorrow.
S. CHRISLEY: Thank you so much.
KAYE (voice-over): This was Savannah after learning of the pardon.
S. CHRISLEY: The president called me personally, as I was walking into Sam's Club, and notified me that he was signing paper -- pardon paperwork
for both of my parents. I still don't believe it's real.
Randi Kaye, CNN, West Palm Beach, Florida
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Well, the beauty brand, Rhode, created by model and T.V. personality, Hailey Bieber, has been sold to Elf Cosmetics for $1 billion.
It is the largest acquisition for Elf to date.
Rhode has capitalized on digital marketing, resulting in long lines for pop-up events and frequent sellouts of their limited product line.
Bieber, who's married to pop star, Justin Bieber, will stay at Rhode as the company's chief creative officer and head of innovation.
Elf dominates the skincare and makeup market for teens and younger consumers and says they will expand Rhode's retail presence.
Still to come, a pair of childhood friends are taking their music skills to one of the biggest venues in the world, just as they graduate from high
school. Their story, up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:50:18]
GOLODRYGA: A Chinese space launch could shed light on two intriguing objects on our solar system. The Tianwen-2 Mission will collect samples
from an asteroid that may be a chunk chipped off of the moon.
The space rock has become a quasi-satellite near our planet Earth and the mission will return the samples in about two and a half years. Then the
probe will spend about seven years traveling to a comet orbiting between Mars and Jupiter.
Well, graduation season is upon us here in the United States and a lot of us remember how big those first few weeks felt after leaving high school.
Two childhood friends are about to travel across the globe for one last big adventure together before they start their next chapter of their lives.
Forrest Sanders reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SANDERS: Is this the earliest known picture of the two of you?
HILL: I think so. Probably.
HENRY: This is goofing off in class and making our teachers mad.
SANDERS (voice-over): Ethan Hill and Ty Henry became friends in second grade, best friends in third grade have remained bonded through.
HILL: A whole lot of shenanigans.
SANDERS (voice-over): Yes. There's this one in joke having to do with carrots. Back when they were at Grassland Middle, they used to throw
carrots up on the roof.
SANDERS: Those were perfectly good carrots.
SANDERS (voice-over): Their teacher at the time, Susan Abell, didn't love it, but --
SUSAN ABELL, MIDDLE SCHOOL ORCHESTRA TEACHER: I mean, it's just carrots. It could be a lot worse than throwing carrots.
SANDERS (voice-over): Then there's also the time Ethan and Ty remodeled Miss Abell's class and --
HENRY: We decided to make her classroom into a racetrack.
ABELL: They always make me laugh.
SANDERS (voice-over): But, you know, there's another interest Ethan and Ty shared that's not shenanigans.
(INSTRUMENT PLAYING)
HILL: You know, we wanted to do something together in school and we both liked music.
SANDERS (voice-over): You see, Miss Abell was Ethan and Ty's first orchestra teacher when they were in sixth grade.
ABELL: It's really cool to see the growth, the confidence.
SANDERS (voice-over): They both passed auditions to what's called the Honors Performance Series, which pulls rising young musicians from around
the world. With that orchestra, they've already gotten to perform at Carnegie Hall.
And in July, they leave here to go perform at the Sydney Opera House in Australia. It's all a long way, from those early days of middle school
learning from Miss Abell.
HILL: I felt horrible for my parents. There was a lot of screeching noises and horrible twinkle twinkle little star.
SANDERS (voice-over): Ethan and Ty have just graduated from Franklin High. Ethan's going to play in the orchestra at Western Kentucky University while
Ty is going into the military.
The Sydney trip is their big adventure together before they start the rest of their lives.
[12:55:00]
SANDERS: You guys going to miss each other?
HENRY: Maybe a little bit. I don't know. I think he'll miss me more.
ABELL: I was like so close to me crying.
SANDERS (voice-over): Miss Abell watched so much of the journey. From carrots on school rooftops, to classroom obstacle courses, to real musical
talent, and a trip to be remembered forever.
ABELL: And so it's cool because you never know what is going to happen when they walk in the door in sixth grade. So getting to see that pan out is a
real gift.
SANDERS (voice-over): I'm Forrest Sanders, News Channel 5.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Wishing those two friends all the best. Congratulations on graduating from high school.
Well, that does it for this hour of "ONE WORLD." I'm Bianna Golodryga. Thanks so much for watching. "AMANPOUR" is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
