Return to Transcripts main page
One World with Zain Asher
Supreme Court Lets Trump Administration End Temporary Immigration For 500K People; Officials: Trump Administration Frustrated With China; Israel Faces Growing Condemnation As Gaza Aid Distribution Devolves Into Chaos; New York Detectives Investigated In Crypto Kidnapping Case; Big Wins, Big Losses: Trump's Wild Week In The Courts. Aired 12-12:45p ET
Aired May 30, 2025 - 12:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:00:44]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Live from New York, I'm Bianna Golodryga. You're watching the second hour of "ONE WORLD."
And for the second time this month, the U.S. Supreme Court has handed the Trump administration a win in its battle against immigration.
Happening a short time ago, the court said it would allow the Trump administration to suspend a Biden-era program that allowed a half million
immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to work and live in the United States temporarily. The White House deputy chief of staff had
this to say about the ruling.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF: It's not the job of a district court judge to perform an individual green light or red light on
every single policy that the president takes as the head of the executive branch.
This is the most litigated issue over the last 10 years. Over the last 10 years, whether or not to deport the foreigners who invaded our country
illegally. That is the most litigated issue.
You want a democracy in this country? When Americans vote, when they cry out and they beg for a president to come and save them from this invasion
and some district court judge in San Francisco or Manhattan or Los Angeles tries to shut it down and shield these foreigners from deportation?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Priscilla Alvarez joins us now live from Washington with the details. So we're talking about a half a million immigrants here who came
to the United States and were accepted under President Biden under the guise of humanitarian parole as their status.
Now, they're going to lose their work permits, Priscilla? And what does that mean in terms of their status here? Are they going to have to leave
immediately?
PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Bianna, this is certainly a major blow to the nationals of those four countries. But we should know or
know that there were some or many of these migrants that once they arrived to the United States, through this parole program, sought other forms of
protection and immigration relief. This is particularly true with Cubans as well as some of these other nationalities.
Because again, while the parole program allowed them to be vetted and come through to the United States in an organized way, that's the way the Biden
administration had framed it, when they were here, they could apply to other forms of relief. We just don't have that number. But all the same, it
will impact again these four nationalities in the United States.
Now what the Supreme Court ruled here is that the administration could end these deportation protections. It wasn't the final decision. This is going
to continue in the lower courts. And two of the liberal justices dissented in this decision.
But in addition to that, this has been a program that was the target of Republicans during the Biden administration. Because even though this has
been an existing authority, this being parole, Republicans argued that former President Joe Biden overreached when he allowed these nationalities
to come to the United States via this program, a program, or rather an authority that was supposed to be done by in a case-by-case basis.
Now, this program, just to give viewers a -- a -- a background as to what needed to happen here, individuals would be vetted to come to the United
States. They also had to have a sponsor in the United States or some tie in the United States already to come through this program. And as you
mentioned there at the top, nearly half a million people benefited from it.
Now this, again, we will try to get numbers as to how many remain in this program that could be impacted. But it was supposed to be a two-year
program for them to live and work in the United States legally.
Now as you also mentioned, this is the second time the Supreme Court has sided with the administration, the administration, of course, peeling back
many of the deportation protections that were issued under the Biden administration.
And as a result, many hundreds of thousands of people will now be without papers in the United States, which of course could make them eligible for
deportation.
All of this, of course, Bianna, as we've learned from sources, that there is now yet another push by the White House to arrest far more people, 3,000
people, a day as they try to execute on those lofty goals set by the president, a million deportations annually.
So all of this is happening against the backdrop of this immense pressure by the White House to execute more immigration arrests and deportations.
And certainly more people may fall in the crosshairs of those operations following today's Supreme Court ruling.
[12:05:10]
GOLODRYGA: All right. Priscilla Alvarez in Washington for us. Thank you.
In the next hour, the Trump administration will say goodbye to one of its highest profile faces, Elon Musk. President Trump and Musk will meet in the
Oval Office and hold a news conference.
The world's richest man was tapped to lead the Department of Government Efficiency, but Musk now says that his time with the administration has
come to an end. We'll bring you that event live in the next hour.
Well, Donald Trump says so much for being Mr. Nice Guy. That was the president's response to what he says is China's violation of its trade deal
with the U.S.
Under that deal, China and the U.S. reduces their respective tariffs while trade negotiations were underway, but those talks may be going nowhere
fast. Here's what the Treasury Secretary told Fox News.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: I would say that they are a bit stalled. I believe that we will be having more talks with them in the next
few weeks. And I believe we may, at some point, have a call between the president and party chair sheet.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: This caps a whiplash week for Trump's tariffs. On Wednesday, one federal court blocked most of the president's tariffs, saying that he
overstepped his authority.
Less than a day later, an appeals court put that decision on hold while the government prepares its appeal.
Now, the measures the Trump administration has taken against China this week were all due to frustration over trade talks between Beijing and
Washington. That's according to three administration officials who say suspending the sale of critical tech to Chinese companies and revoking
visas for Chinese students are part of a unified administration strategy. They say China failed to live up to its commitments during talks earlier
this month.
Here to discuss CNN's U.S. security correspondent Kylie Atwood, who is joining us live from the State Department.
Kylie, once again, we hear from government officials, this time, the Treasury Secretary suggesting that there may be a phone call in the works
between President Xi and President Trump. I don't know that they've had one actually, but the fact that they haven't yet, and this kind of rhetoric
seems to be one-sided coming from the United States, does suggest that -- that there is at least more public frustration from the U.S. as to where
things stand now than where China stands, which has always been saying that publicly tariffs don't benefit either party.
What are you hearing from your sources?
KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN U.S. SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Bianna, what we've seen over the last 24 hours is really a lot of private frustration with the
state of these trade talks now becoming public frustration.
We had reported just last night that there were intense frustrations within the Trump administration over the fact that at those trade talks earlier
this month, there was the expectation that China had agreed to lifting some of its ex -- exports limiting on ex -- excuse me, limiting of experts on
rare-earth minerals. And they haven't actually done that yet.
And so administration officials were growing concern. And as a result, they pulled out some new China policies that are unrelated to the actual trade
talks themselves, but are part of this overall strategy to be tough towards China, to demonstrate to them that there will be repercussions for them not
living up to these trade talks.
What -- what it represents, Bianna, is the fact that these trade talks are really central to the administration's overall foreign policy approach
towards China, that nothing here is happening in a silo. It's all very interconnected. And we saw President Trump earlier today expressing
frustration about China not living up to these trade talks.
We saw Stephen Miller on CNN just in the last hour talking about the fact that when the Secretary of State earlier this week rolled out the
department's plan to restrict aggressively visas for Chinese students here in the United States to go after and review those Chinese student visas
here, that was connected to China not living up to commitments it made in those trade talks.
So we really have to watch and see where this goes, because Stephen Miller also said that there would be other measures that the administration is
considering if China doesn't live up to those commitments.
And, of course, as you mentioned, that Trump-Xi called, we haven't seen it happen in recent weeks. President Trump, even said a few weeks ago, that he
was expecting it to happen. It simply has not, but there are certainly administration officials who believe that it is a necessity at this point.
GOLODRYGA: Indeed. And, of course, you've seen the markets really just express frustration too, if there's indeed even more uncertainty as to
where those talks stand right now as it relates to tariffs.
Kylie Atwood, thank you so much.
[12:10:01]
Well, international pressure on Israel is building over the war in Gaza with France now issuing a dramatic deadline.
President Emmanuel Macron says Israel has hours or days to improve what he's calling the current humanitarian tragedy. And he warns if sufficient
progress isn't made, the European Union will take a, quote, tougher stance.
Israel accused the French president of embarking on a crusade against it. But President Macron isn't the only one sounding the alarm about the dire
conditions following an 11-week Israeli blockade on all food, fuel, and medicine.
Earlier, the spokesman for the U.N.'s humanitarian agency said 100 percent of the population in Gaza is at risk of famine.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENS LAERKE, OCHA SPOKESMAN: This limited number of truckloads that are coming in, is a trickle. It is drip-feeding food into an area on the verge
of catastrophic hunger. It's not a flood. Gaza is the hungriest place on earth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: He also called the current attempt by a controversial U.S. and Israeli-backed distribution initiative, one of the most obstructed aid
operations in recent history.
Hamas, meanwhile, has issued a counterproposal for a ceasefire in Gaza in response to the latest U.S. plan supported by Israel.
CNN's Jeremy Diamond joins me now live from Tel Aviv. Jeremy, let me just start with the aid distribution centers there now in its third or fourth
day, actually. We saw some chaos in those early few hours and days. Have things settled at all? Have more hubs opened?
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: No. In fact, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation only had one hub that was open for distribution
today, whereas yesterday they had three.
So, it seems like they are still struggling to be able to scale this operation up in a way that would actually alleviate the hunger crisis that
is currently gripping the Gaza Strip.
And beyond that, I -- I -- we've also now confirmed that Palestinians entering these aid distribution points are not being screened at all by the
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which is quite surprising given the fact that that is exactly the reason why Israeli officials said that this new aid
mechanism was needed in order to have more stringent verification protocols to prevent Hamas from getting this aid.
And in fact, we've already seen some evidence of criminal gangs and merchants taking advantage of the situation, actually paying people,
according to eyewitnesses, to go into these sites and bring them back aid, which can then be resold at a higher price on Gaza's markets.
The -- the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation told me in response to that that they are more concerned about alleviating the hunger crisis at this moment
than checking IDs. And they said they would reassess the situation in the further.
But it is important to note that that is kind of the entire reason for this foundation existing, this claim that it would be a more secure distribution
mechanism.
Now, beyond that, it's important to know that they do, of course, have, you know, private military contractors who are transporting that aid into Gaza
who are securing these sites.
But once individuals are walking into these sites, there's no security checks, no ID checks being done. And it seems to be making it more
difficult for the people who actually need this aid to make sure that it gets to those individuals.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And we'll talk about where the ceasefire talks stand now with Barak Ravid. But it is notable that Hamas is insisting on the United
Nations to be providing that aid in Israel, as we know, has said absolutely not. They will not be allowing the United Nations to do that right now.
Jeremy Diamond, thank you.
CNN's political and global affairs analyst Barak Ravid joins me.
And that's a perfect segue to get into where these talks stand, Barak, because there were reports yesterday that perhaps a ceasefire deal was
imminent, that the United States had presented Israel with a plan that Israel had accepted that would see some 10 live hostages released and --
and the bodies of maybe even up to 18 or 20 that are still there in exchange for a 60-day ceasefire.
Hamas seemed to renege on that deal. Where do things stand now?
BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: So I think the -- the whole internal situation within Hamas is, first, complicated, second,
fascinating, because this is what we need to now try -- this is what we need to try and dissect to understand where things are.
So, when White House envoy Witkoff presented his plan yesterday, he had some sort of a firm idea that it's not going to be rejected. And when the -
- the -- when the proposal was given, some parts of Hamas leadership in Qatar thought that it's something that they can work with, but the other
part thought that it was completely preposterous.
[12:15:08]
And there was an internal discussion within Hamas, internal fight within Hamas over what should be the answer. And this fight is still ongoing. This
debate is still ongoing. Hamas just issued a statement two minutes ago saying that they're discussing the proposal with other Palestinian
factions. And I think that we are -- this is still work in progress. There's still no final decision within Hamas.
GOLODRYGA: What does this say about the state of control and leadership of Hamas right now? Israel just confirming last week or just a few days ago
that in fact they had killed Mohammed Sinwar in a strike a few weeks ago. It appears that all of the main players who have been behind the October
7th attack have been killed or no longer in the picture.
Who's in charge in Gaza?
RAVID: That -- that -- that's a good question. The -- the -- the most senior person within Hamas's military leadership in Gaza right now is the
Gaza Brigade Commander Izz al-Din Haddad, who is a senior military commander, but he's not someone who is perceived as an authority over any -
- every Hamas member in the Gaza Strip.
That's part of the problem because right now, there are several power centers within Hamas in Doha, in Qatar. And there's the power center in
Gaza. But the power center in Gaza right now is in flux. It's in limbo because there's no clear commander.
Therefore, there's a very big problem within Hamas to take decisions at the moment. And this is why you see this internal debate and the fact that you
hear contradictory messages from this terror group at the moment.
GOLODRYGA: Meantime, I do want to ask you about what appears to be a massive expansion of settlements in the West Bank. I believe it's reported
that as many as 22 new settlements have been agreed to be established by the government right now. That has been met with condemnation.
Even the Saudi foreign minister reportedly planning on traveling to the West Bank to show solidarity with Palestinians there.
What does that say about the state of any type of normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia and the timing of this announcement of the new
settlements?
RAVID: Well, first, I don't think there's any normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia in the next. You know, I'll be -- I'll be conservative
here. In the next six to 12 months, I -- I just don't see that. It's not in the cards.
The Saudi bar is very, very high. Much higher than the Israeli government is willing to accept. And therefore, I don't see that.
And what's going on in the West Bank and what you just said about the new settlements, I think the Trump administration, in the last few months, most
of its focus was on the Gaza. There's no focus at all from the United States about what is going on in the West Bank.
And I think that when the Trump administration will start looking at what's going on in the West Bank, it will realize that under the radar, this --
the current Israeli government did many, many things that down the road could really complicate Trump's agenda in the region.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And, of course, I will have to have you back on to talk about where things stands with the U.S. and Iran nuclear talks. So the
president seems to be quite optimistic about reaching a deal. Again, like he says, everything will happen in two weeks with the Russia-Ukraine war.
RAVID: Yes, yes.
GOLODRYGA: He also said that maybe there will be a deal within two weeks here. As we tell our guests, Barak, we don't make any plans for the next
two weeks. Please.
RAVID: Yes.
GOLODRYGA: We need your reporting. Thank you so much. Good to see you.
RAVID: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: And still to come for us, Sean "Diddy" Combs' former rival is speaking out from his prison cell. Hear why Suge Knight thinks Combs should
take the stand in the ongoing trial.
Plus, a bizarre new twist in a crypto kidnapping case. Why New York police are now being questioned. That's just ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:20:59]
GOLODRYGA: Court is back in session in the Sean "Diddy" Combs trial where the music mogul is facing charges of racketeering and sex trafficking.
One of his former employees, a woman known to the public only as Mia, is on the witness stand for the second day. This morning, Mia testified that he
threatened her job and threatened to kill her. Mia said she tried to run away but was afraid that he would ruin her reputation.
In the meantime, imprisoned former rap mogul Suge Knight says that he believes his former rival Combs should take the stand himself. He called in
to Laura Coates Show on CNN from his prison cell. Here's what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SUGE KNIGHT, FORMER RECORD EXECUTIVE: I feel if he do tell us truth, he really would walk. If Puffy go up there and say, hey, I might have did
weirdo things, I did all the drugs. I wasn't, you know, I wasn't in control of my life at the time.
And he can -- he can humanize his own self and the jury might give him a shot. But if they keep him sitting down, it's like he's scared to face the
music.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: And we will continue to follow the trial and bring you updates as we get them.
A bizarre crypto kidnapping case has landed two New York City detectives under investigation. A wealthy 28-year-old Italian crypto trader escaped
from this apartment after he says he was abducted and tortured for weeks, all to obtain his Bitcoin password.
CNN's Josh Campbell reports on the rise of cryptocurrency-related crime.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A daring escape captured on this video, obtained exclusively by CNN. The alleged victim, an
unidentified Italian cryptocurrency trader who prosecutors say was held hostage for several weeks in Manhattan.
Two men are now charged with kidnapping and assault, among other counts.
In Paris, four masked men attempting to kidnap the daughter and grandson of a French cryptocurrency executive.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get off, sir.
CAMPBELL: Coming after two other kidnappings in France that involved hand- and-finger mutilations as part of demands for ransom.
And last year, a judge in Florida sentenced a man to 47 years in prison for stealing more than $3.5 million in virtual currency after he and
coconspirators targeted victims in violent home invasions.
ARI REDBORD, GLOBAL HEAD OF POLICY, TRM LABS: They're just criminal gangs who are looking to go where the money is to steal large amounts.
CAMPBELL (voice-over): Law enforcement is now ramping up efforts to combat these emerging threats, called wrench attacks, that target victims with
physical violence or threats and coerce them to reveal crypto passwords.
REDBORD: Bad actors can move funds faster and in larger amounts than ever before. And that's why they're moving quickly in these types of cases to
try to get that -- those passwords and move the funds.
ADAM HEALY, CEO, STATION70: This is only getting worse.
CAMPBELL (voice-over): While criminals face the risk of being caught, they potentially stand to reap millions. And experts say physical threats of
violence require much less sophistication.
HEALY: Being able to break a human is actually not as hard as oftentimes as breaking a safe or breaking some smart contract or breaking some
encryption.
CAMPBELL (voice-over): This month, federal prosecutors announced charges against 12 people for stealing more than $263 million in virtual currency
by hacking into cryptocurrency databases and defrauding victims through bogus schemes.
[12:25:06]
According to the indictment, the men used the money for nightclub services, exotic cars, jewelry, luxury goods and renting private jets and mansions.
The FBI is seeing an explosion in cyber-related complaints from victims, pointing to a new record for losses reported in 2024. The reported losses
from cryptocurrency fraud alone more than $9 billion.
Security experts say the actual number of violent threats related to cryptocurrency is likely severely underreported. And in an age where
companies have spent billions to lock down their computer networks from intrusion, now the physical safety of cryptocurrency users can't be
ignored.
HEALY: You can have executive protection. Your board can get engaged. But at the end of the day, you're your own first responder. You need to have
situational awareness. You need to be aware of your surroundings.
CAMPBELL: Now, an important update on that New York case that we just brought you. We're learning from multiple law enforcement sources that an
NYPD detective who was assigned to the security detail of Mayor Eric Adams was working off duty at a private security job and allegedly delivered the
victim to his tormentors.
It remains a big question for investigators right now whether that detective actually knew what was about to transpire. We're told that
remains under investigation.
Now, I've spoken with people in the crypto industry who point out that the odds of a violent incident like this happening is very low when you think
of the millions and millions of crypto owners around the world.
But this is very much the evolution of crime. You know, three decades ago there was a surge in bank robberies because that's where the money is.
Today, these crypto markets are becoming very lucrative targets for these thieves.
Josh Campbell, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Josh for that report. For more on this, I want to bring in CNN's John Miller.
So, John, let's first start with this investigation involving two NYPD detectives as it relates to this case. What more do we know about their
potential role here?
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, Bianna, one is assigned to the mayor's security detail as one of the
mayor's body guard. He was off duty working this private security job. The other detective is assigned to the Narcotics Bureau and was also working
off duty for the same security company.
The real question here is, was there off duty employment authorized by the NYPD? But the more important question is, what did they see? What did they
hear? Were they aware that the man that they dropped off at that residence during the time they were driving for the -- the main suspect was being
held captive?
Did they hear anything in the house? Did they even get inside the house during those 17 days? And that is something internal affairs wants to know,
but also the detectives working on the investigation.
GOLODRYGA: And I do want to ask you about the increase in crypto crimes that we've seen. And as we heard from Josh and his report, they're likely
underreported, if anything, this is an industry that is lucrative because it is very difficult to follow.
Perhaps they're because of the protection on the one hand and the difficulty in accessing accounts. But on the other hand, it has always been
something that fostered a crime potentially.
So, what is the NYPD or the FBI, in general, are they beefing up their investment in investigating these types of crimes?
MILLER: Well, they are only because, Bianna, as you point out, more of these crimes are coming through the -- the front door.
And as Josh Campbell hinted in his story, look, the real vulnerability here is that if this was money being hacked from computers at a bank, if it was
being moved, you can stop it, you can recover it, you can bring it back, you can follow it around the global financial system, one that you
understand better than I do.
But here's the thing about crypto. When it moves from one wallet to another, that trade is meant to be irreversible. And it goes from one set
of numbers to another. But when you're stealing it and you move it to that wallet and then you spread it to 10 other crypto wallets, and then you
start converting it to cash, the trail goes really cold really fast.
And that's why it's become so attractive to criminals who can't figure out how to crack it with technology, but they can figure out how to crack it by
forcing it out of people. That's why we're seeing these kidnaps and assaults. And that's why we're hearing established crypto bosses talking
about the same thing CEOs were talking about after Brian Thompson was gunned down, the CEO of UnitedHealth, which is --
GOLODRYGA: Security.
MILLER: -- we may need more security. Exactly.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
All right. John Miller, thank you. Have a good weekend.
MILLER: Thanks, Bianna. You too.
GOLODRYGA: Coming up for us, a week of wins and tough losses for Donald Trump at the courts. We'll take a closer look with a presidential historian
after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:30:29]
GOLODRYGA: Well, the big story today, and it feels like the big story almost every day this week, has been Donald Trump versus the courts.
As we told you earlier, he got a win in the Supreme Court when it said just hours ago that he can suspend the humanitarian parole status of migrants
and deport them. That could affect up to half a million migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.
Of course, he also suffered high-profile defeats in the courts, like when a judge stopped him from revoking Harvard student visa access, or when many
of his terrorists were ruled illegal by a trade court. That ruling is now on hold.
Trump has also made headlines this week in the diplomatic arena voicing his frustration with Vladimir Putin and the lack of progress toward a Ukraine
peace agreement.
Time now for "The Exchange." Joining me is Tim Naftali. He's CNN presidential historian and a senior research scholar at Columbia School of
International and Public Affairs.
Tim, I wish we had an hour soloed between the two of us just to go over this topic, because it is fascinating from a historic perspective.
Let's start with the president targeting Harvard University specifically and going after its international student program, and even expanding that
to international student visas, not just at Harvard, but across the board here and institutions of higher learning in the United States.
How does that compare to previous presidential clashes with universities, if at all?
TIM NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Bianna, it's a pleasure to be with you.
[12:35:01]
Richard Nixon despised the Ivy League on his one secret tapes. They're not secret any longer. You can hear him say, I'm going to get them. I'm --
they're going to feel it there, but I'm going to shut them down. He wanted to shut down federal funding to universities who's angry at liberal elites
for being complacent and supportive of dissent against the Vietnam War.
But he didn't do it. And why didn't he do it? He didn't do it because members of his own administration, Republicans, he had appointed, said this
is a bad idea. You don't want to do this. You don't want to stop funding the science.
And moreover, Congress and the American people won't support you. This will be a black eye for your administration.
And so they did -- the term of art in the United States as they slow walked it. In other words, the -- the -- the president would order and order it
and order it and they wouldn't do it.
Ultimately got to a point where three major assistance in the -- the budget bureau, it's called OMB, they threatened to resign over this issue. So the
president never got what he wanted.
And at -- and at the end of his administration, before Watergate sent him out the door, Congress, which had a sense that the president wanted to
cancel appropriations. Past and ultimately over a veto, sustained a bill called the Impoundment Act, which places limits on the president's ability
to cancel funds that have been appropriated by Congress. In other words, to universities.
But this has been tested only in lower courts, the Impoundment Act. It's never risen to the Supreme Court and the Harvard versus Trump competition
or actually struggle may finally lead to a Supreme Court decision on what a president can actually do about appropriations officially, formally and
properly determined by Congress with the support of the president.
I mean, after all, he is canceling funds that were approved by a previous Congress and signed by President Biden.
So this should be very interesting and it's very hard to predict what will happen, although it seems highly unlikely that the courts are going to side
with decisions that are made on anger and peak and hatred.
The president has a lot of sway when it's a matter of national security and we'll be talking about that in a moment. But it was in a matter of an
institution he doesn't like. Courts are going to look very carefully at that because that's not one of his constitutional authorities. He has a
constitutional authority regarding national security. Courts are not going to look at his motives.
But if it's just because he doesn't like an institution, the courts are going to have a hard time. I'm talking about the highest court in -- in
accepting that presidential cancellation of a congressional constitutional authority.
GOLODRYGA: And we know he abhors the Impoundment Act. And perhaps you've just hint -- hinted on why he's willing to pursue this all the way up to
the Supreme Court because this has been an issue he has been determined to win in bypass, I think, in both terms, no it's safe to say.
Let's talk about tariffs and this decision by the U.S. Court of International Trade ruling that Trump overstepped his authority by imposing
those sweeping tariffs using the Emergency Powers Act.
Now, there are other provisions in which he could impose tariffs, just not those -- the -- using the emergency powers.
What are the implications for a -- a president when courts overturn economic policy initiatives that are at -- at least presented as national
security threats by the president?
NAFTALI: Well, here's the weakness in the president's argument. Remember I was talking about core constitutional authorities, national security,
because which flows from the president's rules of commander chief is one of them.
One that he does not have is the power of imposing tariffs. That is not a constitutional authority of the presidency of the Article II Constitution.
It's Congress's role. In fact, former Vice President Mike Pence tweeted about that on X yesterday.
What happened has happened over time is Congress has delegated its constitutional authority or actually shared it over tariffs and the economy
with the president. But in the 1970s, Congress felt that the president had overused this emergency power.
By the way, the use of this emergency power and peacetime started with Franklin Roosevelt during the Depression.
And so Congress tried to put limits on it in a bill that frankly was extremely obscure until recently the interna -- the international economic
Emergency Economic Powers Act.
GOLODRYGA: IEEPA. Yes.
NAFTALI: President Trump did not -- yes, IEEPA. President Trump did not follow that act in his liberation day tariffs. That act requires that
there'd be an unusual or extraordinary threat to the United States.
[12:40:09]
What is the unusual or extraordinary threat posed by a U.S. trade surplus with countries? We actually put tariffs on countries that buy more from us
than we buy from them. What kind of threat is that?
So the use of IEEPA was unjustified, according to the law of 1977. So the president is actually being taken to task for it. You asked a great
question. How do you enforce it? This is going to keep going up to the highest level.
When the Supreme Court finds that he has exceeded his authority, what does the Supreme Court do to im -- to enforce it?
Well, traditionally, you had two ways of ensuring presidents would listen. One, the threat of impeachment. Well, that doesn't exist at the moment. The
Republican House is not going to impeached president -- President Trump.
The other is public opinion. For most of our history, Americans have expected presidents to abide by the Supreme Court. That's not quite true in
the mid-19th -- in the early 19th century. Americans seem to side with Andrew Jackson.
But since the Andrew -- the Jackson era, Americans have expected presidents to follow the Supreme Court.
What will happen if the president says, no, I understand national security better than anyone? I can define what an unusual threat is and I find an
unusual threat here. The Supreme Court is wrong. And we don't know what will happen.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And what will happen if the Supreme Court, the third branch of government says, hey, branch number one and two, you got to work this
out amongst yourselves? So -- so that -- that could also be a possibility here. Who knows?
But we are an unchartered territory because as you noted, the president has not used this particular act for national security reasons the way he has.
And -- and it's been quite effectively not down.
NAFTALI: He is used -- he's used it for national security reasons, but he's never used it for tariffs in all the years.
GOLODRYGA: Right.
NAFTALI: And it's been -- there have been many national emergencies. Primarily, they're used to sanction people and countries.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. What is the -- what is the emergency --
NAFTALI: They have -- it's not been used for tariffs.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. What is the emergency of sanctioning islands that are uninhabited by people? That was one of the questions raised.
All right. CNN --
NAFTALI: Penguins.
GOLODRYGA: Penguins. Exactly. Those poor penguins.
All right. CNN presidential historian Tim Naftali. Thank you. Good to see you.
NAFTALI: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: And finally, the infamous and anonymous British street artist named Banksy has revealed an intriguing new artwork. It depicts the shadow
of a metal street pole forming the silhouette of a lighthouse. The accompanying text reads, "I want to be what you saw in me."
The image was unveiled on Banksy's Instagram account. It is unclear where the work is located. Some of Banksy's art pieces sell for millions of
dollars. Quite intriguing there. Where is it?
All right. That does it for this hour of "ONE WORLD." Thanks so much for watching. I'm Bianna Golodryga. "MARKETPLACE AFRICA" is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[12:45:00]
(MARKETPLACE AFRICA)
END
