Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Any Moment, Trump to Speak With Zelenskyy; Hearing in Case Challenging Trump's Slashing of DEI Programs; Chief Justice Roberts Rebukes Trump Over Call to Impeach Judge. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired March 19, 2025 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Pamela Brown. Happening now, breaking news, critical call. President Trump and Ukrainian Volodymyr Zelenskyy are set to speak at any moment. This comes just one day after President Trump spoke with Russia's Vladimir Putin and just hours after Ukraine and Russia exchanged attacks.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: And I'll speak live with the retired U.S. Supreme Court justice, Stephen Breyer, as the Trump administration pushes the powers of the executive branch and the very rare rebuke from the chief justice, John Roberts.

Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in The Situation Room.

And we start with the breaking news. President Trump is expected to speak to Ukrainian President Zelenskyy at any moment.

Let's go live right now to our Senior White House Reporter Kevin Liptak. What are you learning, Kevin?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, this call expected to begin in the 10:00 Eastern Time hour, and it is an important call, very critical, and it comes just 19 days after that explosive meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy in the Oval Office that resulted in Trump essentially kicking Zelenskyy out of the White House. This will be their first time speaking directly since that fracas and it comes at an important moment, of course, a day after President Trump spoke to his counterpart in Moscow, Vladimir Putin.

What Zelenskyy says is he wants to get more details on that conversation from Donald Trump, specifically about this 30-day pause in attacks on energy infrastructure that Trump and Putin seemed to agree to in that telephone call. Zelenskyy said yesterday that he supported that type of pause. But just this morning, he said that Putin's words were very much at odds with reality, citing these drone attacks that occurred overnight in Ukraine, and so though it will be an important moment for them to discuss how exactly they can move from this pause on energy attacks to the type of broader ceasefire that Ukraine has already agreed to. Now, we did get a chance to talk to a number of White House officials here this morning who gave us some more insights into this pause. We talked to Mike Waltz, the national security adviser, who said that he would be on the phone with Russian and Ukrainian officials today to try and piece together this broader ceasefire. We also heard from Steve Witkoff, the president's foreign envoy, who said that, in his belief, this broader ceasefire could still be achieved within weeks. Wolf?

BLITZER: We shall see. All right, Kevin Liptak at the White House, thank you very much. Pamela?

BROWN: And happening now, Wolf, a preliminary hearing in the case challenging President Trump's plans to slash DEI initiatives. Will a judge rule in favor of ending these inclusion programs in the federal government?

And it's deadline day for the Justice Department. The department has until noon to turn over information on the Trump administration's weekend deportation flights to El Salvador, and that comes on the heels of a judge's ruling to block DOGE's dismantling of USAID, saying it was likely unconstitutional. But President Trump says he plans to appeal.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We have a judge from a very liberal state who ruled like that. So bad for our country.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: So, I guess they closed the department. They're going to have to reopen the department.

TRUMP: We'll be appealing it, I guess. Not I guess, I guarantee you, we will be appealing it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: All right. So, let's bring in CNN Crime and Justice Correspondent Katelyn Polantz. So, what more can you tell us about this ruling, Katelyn?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, with USAID, what the judge is doing is he's saying you can't terminate any more employees, you can't terminate any more contracts and you're going to need to reinstate any applications or data services that employees of that organization were using. So, it's sort of stopping the dismantling of USAID.

But the big picture here, the reason why this ruling is significant is because this is the first time a judge has looked at the constitutionality of the work of Elon Musk and DOGE within the government, shutting down agencies like USAID and said, hey, this might not pass muster under the law.

The reason is because the government in court has continued to say Elon Musk he's not in charge of this agency. He's not Senate- confirmed, and yet there's all these public statements by Donald Trump and Musk himself saying Musk is running it. Musk is on his social media platform saying he's shutting things down.

So, we are looking at a fight between the court, the Trump administration and what they are trying to do across the federal government and Congress, which has some power here.

[10:05:08]

There's also other budding fights in court, including in that migrants case where the Justice Department just keeps reiterating step out of it, let the president do what he wants to deport people. So, a lot of separation of powers fights right now.

BROWN: Certainly. Katelyn Polantz, thank you.

BLITZER: Good work. Thanks a lot.

Also happening now, the markets are anxiously awaiting the Federal Reserve's decision on interest rates set to be announced later this afternoon. And it comes as fears of a possible recession here in the United States appear to be picking up steam. Let's see where the markets stand right now. Take a look at this. The Dow is up more than 200 points.

I want to go live to CNN Business and Politics Correspondent Vanessa Yurkevich. She's joining us from New York. Vanessa, what are we expecting to hear today?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: We are expecting the Fed to hold rates steady for the second time in a row. Just look at this Fed tool tracker that we monitor, a 99 percent chance that the Fed will hold rates steady today, just a 1 percent chance that there's a cut coming.

Now, the Fed has made a lot of progress on inflation, trying to get inflation down to that 2 percent target rate. We are still above that. And that is why some Americans are feeling like prices are still too high. So, there's some work to do there on the Fed's behalf.

But the Fed is likely going to hold rates steady because of something looming very much in the forefront. It's the president's trade war, the president's economic policies and government jobs cuts that the president has made over the past several weeks. Just listen to Jerome Powell a few weeks ago on how he sees the economy right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIR: Despite elevated levels of uncertainty, the U.S. economy continues to be in a good place. We do not need to be in a hurry and we are well-positioned to wait for greater clarity.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YURKEVICH: Clarity is something that investors, Americans, and businesses all want right now, Wolf. At 2:00 P.M., we'll get that Fed rate decision. At 2:30, Jerome Powell, the chair of the Fed, will hold a press conference. He will no doubt be asked about President Trump's policies, his economic policies, the trade war, whether or not he will provide more clarity is something we will have to wait and see.

We will also want to be watching to see if the Fed is still baking in two rate cuts for this year. That could certainly change. Another element that we want to keep an eye out for is if the Fed is planning to battle something called stagflation. That is very tricky. That means rising price or rising prices, but slower growth. That will be a tricky thing to deal with at the Fed. Wolf?

BLITZER: All right, lots of important questions that need to be answered. Vanessa, thank you very, very much, Vanessa Yurkevich reporting. Pamela?

BROWN: This is only the beginning. That is a warning from Israel after airstrikes killed more than 400 people in Gaza overnight. The return to war marks the deadliest day since 2023 and sparked massive protests as tens of thousands demand a return to the ceasefire agreement.

Let's go live now to CNN's International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson in Jerusalem. Nic, what is the latest you're seeing there on the ground?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes. The protests here in Jerusalem have been big in number. We've talked to a lot of people. They got -- they marched for three hours. They arrived near the Knesset. And some of the Knesset members, the former defense minister, Benny Gantz, came out to speak to the crowd. They are so angry and fired up about the situation. It was almost a fisticuff situation. His security detail having to pull him away, people angry that opposition figures like him are not doing enough.

Meanwhile, in Gaza, overnight strikes, not as heavy as the day before, a dozen people, according -- more than a dozen people, according to health officials in Gaza, injured there. But among the injured we've seen, and apparently one death, international U.N. workers, where they say they're building where they were living was hit. And we've seen the video from a CNN cameraman of them arriving in hospital. But also the IDF dropping flyers on the north of Gaza, tens of thousands of Palestinians on the move there again, forced because they're told the military is coming to their area.

BROWN: All right. Nic Robertson in Jerusalem, thank you very much. We'll continue to cover this. Wolf?

BLITZER: A good story, indeed. We'll be watching very closely.

We're also hearing this morning from Mahmoud Khalil, the Palestinian activist who's in detention in Louisiana right now. Khalil says he's, quote, a political prisoner and tells the story of his arrest by Homeland Security agents earlier this month.

Let's go live right now to CNN Correspondent Gloria Pazmino. [10:10:00]

She's in New York. She's been covering the story for us. Gloria, I understand you have some breaking news on a new judge ruling. What's going on?

GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. We just got this decision in the last hour. The judge is siding with the Trump administration, agreeing that New York does not have jurisdiction over the case and saying it should be moved to New Jersey. You remember that's where Khalil was transferred after he was detained here in New York.

After the transfer to New Jersey, he was transferred to Louisiana. So, the judge ruled that the case should be heard in New Jersey. He denied the government's motion to dismiss Khalil's habeas motion. He said that that should be heard but it should be heard in New Jersey.

Now, to this letter from Khalil. We're hearing directly from him for the first time. He dictated this letter from inside Louisiana detention partly blaming the Trump administration as well as Columbia University. Here's some of what Khalil wrote in his letter. He wrote, quote, the Trump administration is targeting me as part of a broader strategy to suppress dissent. He also said that visa holders, green card carriers, and citizens alike will be all targeted for their political beliefs. Finally, he said, at stake are not just our voices but the fundamental civil liberties of all.

And, Wolf, it sounds like whether or not Khalil's constitutional rights were violated will be heard by a judge no longer here in New York but rather in New Jersey. Wolf?

BLITZER: All right. Gloria Pazmino in New York for us reporting, thank you very much. Pamela?

BROWN: And, Wolf, happening right now, the last person seen with a missing college student is now free to leave the Dominican Republic. Joshua Steven Riibe won his fight for freedom after arguing that Dominican authorities restricted his passport, even though he wasn't facing any charges. And this comes after Sudiksha Konanki's parents requested their missing daughter be declared dead.

Let's go live to CNN Correspondent Jessica Hasbun and Santo Domingo. Jessica, what happens now with this investigation?

JESSICA HASBUN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: : Well, after the judge in the Dominican Republic granted Joshua Steven Riibe's request for freedom, he is believed to be the last person to have seen that missing student, Sudiksha Konanki, who vanished on March 6th, nearly two weeks ago in Punta Cana. Like you said, Riibe argued he was detained on property without those charges. He appeared in court on Tuesday to request his freedom.

This came just as Konanki's parents have urged Dominican authorities to officially declare their daughter dead just this Monday, as they believe she drowned with no evidence of foul play while on spring break at the Rue Republica Hotel. Let's take a listen to what they had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUBBARAYUDU KONANKI, FATHER OF SUDIKSHA KONANKI: It is with deep sadness and heavy -- Nana -- and heavy heart that we are coming to the terms with the fact that our daughter has drowned. This is incredibly difficult for us to process. We kindly ask you to keep our daughter in your prayers. We still have (INAUDIBLE) children took care of her.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HASBUN: As far as we know, authorities here in the Dominican Republic continue to look for Konanki in the water by air, land and sea, trying to find her. Apparently, she could be stuck somewhere under the sea on a rock. So, authorities continue this active search for Konanki. That's all I have for now. Back to you.

BROWN: Just absolutely heartbreaking listening to those parents, Jessica Hasbun in Santo Domingo, thank you. Wolf?

BLITZER: So heartbreaking, a University of Pittsburgh student goes to the Dominican Republic for spring break, and this is what happens.

BROWN: It's just -- and you know, we're parents and it's your worst nightmare.

BLITZER: You see the dad, you see the mom, and it's just awful.

BROWN: Yes, it really is.

BLITZER: All right. Still ahead, I'll speak live with the retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer as President Trump battles with the U.S. judicial branch.

And later, fiery exchanges at town halls across America.

BROWN: Voters aren't holding back when it comes to voicing their frustrations.

You're in The Situation Room.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:15:00]

BLITZER: We're tracking the fallout from Chief Justice John Roberts' very rare statement rebuking President Trump's calls to impeach a federal judge who blocked his deportation flights.

Joining us now right here in The Situation Room, the retired U.S. Supreme Court justice, Stephen Breyer. He's the author of the brand new book entitled, Reading the Constitution, Why I Chose Pragmatism, Not Textualism. Here it is, right here, excellent new book. Justice Breyer, thanks so much for joining us. We've good timing to discuss what's going on right now. I know you told our Supreme Court Analyst Joan Biskupic that this very rare statement from the Chief Justice John Roberts was appropriate because it was short, in your words, short, informative, and didn't blame anyone. Why was this the right moment for Chief Justice Roberts to speak out?

STEPHEN BREYER, RETIRED SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: People were talking about the case, and they have been, in your profession, in the District Court of District of Columbia Court, Judge Boasberg and so forth, and look at this statement, two sentences. For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.

[10:20:10]

BLITZER: This is Justice -- Chief Justice Roberts.

BREYER: That's right. And this is his press release. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose. And now, you know, 299 million of our, or more than that, 229 million of our 230 million people, how many do we have?

BLITZER: Something like that.

BREYER: Yes, something like that, are not lawyers. They're not judges. They don't know. And this is an informative and educational statement.

BLITZER: So, you think it was appropriate?

BREYER: I do. Because they don't know, I mean, when you have a district court judge, or you have a court of appeals judge, somebody's going to win and somebody's going to lose. What do you think the losing side thinks of the judge or the judge's decision? Naturally, they think it's wrong. Of course, that happens every day of the week, across the entire country, and judges are wrong sometimes. So, what does that person do? He appeals, he asks for a special writ in some cases, but he gets others to review the decision.

Since 1805, and indeed before, it was always considered in this country. It was Sam -- it was Chase, who was -- they tried to impeach him in 1805. No, you can't.

BLITZER: You don't like a judge's decision, you go ahead and appeal it to a higher court. Correct. And you move on in the legal process as opposed to simply saying, we're going to impeach him.

BREYER: You move on in the legal process. And that just informs this two-sentence statement that tells 330 million people, it tells them what -- how the complicated legal --

BLITZER: So, what does it say about President Trump that he's calling for the impeachment of a federal judge?

BREYER: Well, the statement doesn't mention the president.

BLITZER: But we know what the statement was referring to. The timing is clearly obvious.

BREYER: No, you can ask the person who made the statement. But, you know, he's trying to explain to the people of this country how the legal system works and how it doesn't work. It doesn't work by impeaching a judge because you don't like his decision. And, by the way, you may be right. The other side may be wrong. There are two sides usually.

BLITZER: Take it to an appeal and move on legally in the process.

BREYER: Correct.

BLITZER: The public, as you know, has lost a lot of confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years. Does this court have enough credibility right now with the American people to push back against the president when necessary?

BREYER: You don't want a judge to be looking over his shoulder to public opinion. Suppose that the case involved a criminal case involving a very unpopular person, the judge must be fair. But, but, now, who put this correctly, the but? Professor Freud from my law school. He said, no judge, no judge decides a case by looking to the temperature of the day.

But every judge, every judge is aware of the climate of the era. Now, what does that mean? Perfect. You don't know exactly. You know, no, politics is out. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, you find a couple of cases where the fact that this is the Supreme Court of the United States and we're part of the governing institution where you have to be aware of what's going on in the country. And that might include a political basis.

You see, it's like this. Do you ever read P.G. Wodehouse?

BLITZER: Go ahead.

BREYER: All right. His character gets up. He says, Bernie (ph) got up in the morning. He wasn't disgruntled, but he wasn't exactly gruntled either. You're a judge. You decide what you think is correct in the law, period. But are you aware of what's going on in the country? Yes, you are.

BLITZER: As you know, many Americans think the U.S. Supreme Court is simply too political right now. Democrats are upset about some decisions. Republicans are upset about some decisions. Are the justices on the Supreme Court ever political, from your perspective?

BREYER: The example that I use, I was there 28 years, and I thought it's very political to get appointed by groups who are political groups. The political groups tell the president who they want, but they want someone who will decide on the law, and they think his views of the law are such that it will lean in our direction. The judge is certain he's deciding according to the law. We didn't discuss politics really in a case. No, it's not discussed. That's not part of it. But, of course, some people who are not the judges and see the result like this result, or don't. And, of course, you get statements from them, and of course they see the opinion one way or the other.

[10:25:01]

But that isn't how the judges see it. You wanted an example?

BLITZER: Go ahead.

BREYER: Felix Frankfurter, at the time when the court had a very hard time, trying to get enforced Brown versus Board of Education, the case that said you cannot segregate, that's unconstitutional. We need integration racially, all right? All right, a case comes up to the court and it involves miscegenation, black man, white woman, white man, black woman, marrying. And the court has to decide, is that constitutional? They're going to say that statute that forbids miscegenation isn't. No, it's not.

But Frankfurter says to the court in conference, colleagues, if we decide this now, we will never get Brown v. Board enforced because the South, which, by the way, is having all these signs saying impeach Earl Warren, okay, the South will never do it, and no one's helping us. So, they did not take the case, as they have the right not to. A few years later, they did. They took the case, and they decided it was unconstitutional. But taking it at that moment would have interfered with the effort of the court to get Brown versus Board of Education enforced.

BLITZER: Which was so historic and so significant, indeed, and so overwhelming at the time.

BREYER: Yes.

BLITZER: That it was really critically important.

BREYER: That's right, and that's why you can never say never about anything. I mean, the judges are trying to be judges. They have different views. In this book, I explain why. I think looking to purposes and values and looking to results is important as part of the legal process. Other people think, no, you just read the text, right?

BLITZER: Reading the Constitution, your book, it's so important and the explanations are so understandable even for those of us who aren't lawyers, so it's really, really good, really important. I want you to stand by.

We have more to discuss. We're going to continue this conversation with the former U.S. Supreme Court justice, Stephen Breyer, right after a very short break.

Stay with us. You're in The Situation Room.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]