Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Dangers of TikTok Skin Care Craze; Mike Lindell Loses Defamation Case; Kraft Heinz to Eliminate Artificial Food Dyes; Trump Targets Democratic Cities With ICE Raids. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired June 17, 2025 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

SHIRA SCHEINDLIN, FORMER U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: Well, that's -- as I said, it's a creative argument. It's a close call. It depends a lot about the raids themselves.

You can do raids, but do you do raids in public spaces or private spaces? And can you do raids in sensitive locations, like schools, like hospitals, like churches? And there's law on that, and, of course, courthouses. That's the big one.

So, in schools, the United States Supreme Court has said you can't do raids in schools because there's -- education is more important. The safety of students is more important. So they shouldn't be doing schools at all, although this administration says they're going to go into schools.

Churches, there's a First Amendment right to worship, so you shouldn't be going into churches. But this administration says they're going to go into churches. Up until now, all the presidents up until now have not gone into schools and churches. It was sort of a voluntary restraint.

But this administration says, we can do that. Same with hospitals. There's a human right to health care. There's HIPAA regulations. But, again, this administration says otherwise. And then there's courthouses. And that's a big one, because they want to go into courthouses now, immigration court, federal court, and arrest people in the courthouse.

And so some courts have said, not in my courthouse. But we will see how those turn out.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: I want to ask you about the president's goal here. We're reporting that ICE is racing to meet this goal of 3,000 immigration-related arrests per day.

SCHEINDLIN: Right.

BROWN: Multiple sources tell us that officials are privately facing criticism for failing to meet that goal. Do arbitrary quotas like that raise a red flag at all to you?

SCHEINDLIN: Well, they do. I mean, he's trying to hit numbers and do it any way he can. And that's what's wrong with these raids, that he's trying to go into private spaces without warrants. And you can't do that. You can't just bust into a factory or a home or a business without a warrant.

You need a judicial warrant from a court. An administrative warrant from the Homeland Security is not going to work. You really need to go to court. But they're ignoring all that. They're violating that. They're just doing raids willy-nilly. It's OK in a public space to have reasonable suspicion, although what I just read, in a California town that's 80 percent Hispanic, they're just throwing everybody up against the wall.

Most of them are citizens. So we have got a lot of danger here when you have raids that are not really thought out and really careful just to meet a daily quota. So I am troubled by it, sure.

BROWN: Yes, I'm not familiar with that town that you just referenced.

But I want to go to what...

SCHEINDLIN: I think it was called Montebello, something like that in California.

BROWN: OK.

(CROSSTALK)

SCHEINDLIN: ... population is 80 percent Hispanic.

BROWN: OK, yes, we will definitely dig in a little bit deeper there.

So I also want to ask you about the shifting immigration policies. Now we have the source telling CNN that the Department of Homeland Security has reverse guidance and will now allow ICE to resume raids at these farms, hotels and restaurants. I know we were just sort of talking about that. But now it's -- they're reversing it.

There's been a bit of whiplash over the president's policies. What do you make of that, these quick changes?

SCHEINDLIN: I guess what I make of it is, it's typical of this president. He's made quick changes on everything, on tariffs, on immigration. He says one thing one day and the opposite the next day. So we never know where he's going with it.

So I thought he said, with farms and with hospitality, that we were -- he was not going to have raids there. Now I think you're telling me he's reversed himself on that.

BROWN: Right. Yes.

SCHEINDLIN: So I thought he was protecting those industries because he got a lot of pressure from the secretary of agriculture and others. So I thought he wasn't going there.

But I'm telling you, about raids, you have to be really careful where they are and what authority you have to do it. You cannot simply bust into private spaces without warrants.

BROWN: All right, Judge Shira Scheindlin, great to have you back on. Thank you so much.

SCHEINDLIN: Thank you.

BROWN: Wolf.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: All right, Pamela, new this morning, changes are coming to some of your favorite snacks.

Kraft Heinz is planning to remove all synthetic food dyes from its food and drinks by the end of 2027. That means Jell-O, Kool-Aid and Jet-Puffed marshmallows, for example, could soon look a little different.

For more on this, we're joined now by CNN's Meg Tirrell.

Meg, Kraft Heinz is one of the first U.S. packaged food companies to commit to removing artificial dyes from its brands. Could this put a lot of pressure on other companies to follow suit?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it absolutely could, Wolf.

And, of course, that's probably the hope of the FDA and the Department of Health and Human Services, which announced this plan to phase out these synthetic food dyes in April over the next two years. But some of the criticisms of that plan was that it was essentially voluntary for most of these dyes, so really depended on the companies going along with it.

[11:35:02]

And, so far, we haven't heard universally that these big food companies are going to. So now Kraft Heinz, this really big name behind a lot of these brands we know, like Jell-O and Kool-Aid, and, of course, Kraft Mac and Cheese, saying that they will have no new products with artificial dyes effective immediately and they're committing to removing all artificial colors by the end of 2027.

But, of course, they also say that 90 percent of their brands already don't have -- or 90 percent of their products already don't have artificial colors. So this really only applies to a few products like the ones you mentioned, Kool-Aid and Jell-O, of course, with those bright colors that we're all familiar with, Wolf.

BLITZER: So, Meg, what changes has Kraft already made and what FDA bans are already, for all practical purposes, in effect?

TIRRELL: Yes, so we know that they actually made this change to Kraft Mac and Cheese, for example, back in 2016.

We know that that has that really bright orange color that everybody associates with Kraft Mac and Cheese. But actually about 10 years ago, they swapped out artificial colors for things like turmeric, annatto and paprika, which, of course, we know from our own spice cabinets, have these really vibrant colors.

And that didn't really appear to change people's interest in that product. And across their portfolio, if you look at a lot of their different things, from Oscar Mayer to Velveeta, they don't have artificial colors already. So this really is limited to just a few of their brands.

But, of course, there are already FDA regulations in place, at least for one food dye, a red food dye, that had shown a potential cancer link in animals. And more broadly than the FDA, states are starting to act on this as well, Wolf. States like California already have laws in place banning artificial food dyes, and more than half of states, according to the Environmental Working Group, have legislation the table.

This particularly targets food dyes in schools. And so they could be just trying to get ahead of all of this legislation that's going state by state -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, Meg Tirrell, thank you very much for that update. Appreciate it very much.

And just ahead: a loss for Mike Lindell. The vocal Trump supporter and election conspiracy theorist learns the price of defamation.

That's next right here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:41:43]

BLITZER: A federal judge in Colorado says MyPillow founder Mike Lindell defamed a former employee of Dominion Voting Systems.

BROWN: The jury found that two of Lindell's statements about Eric Coomer were defamatory. And now Lindell and his online media platform will have to pay Coomer more than $2 million in damages.

It's much less than the nearly $63 million Coomer wanted, but Lindell says this is not over.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL LINDELL, CEO, MYPILLOW: You know, we're looking at appealing, of course, because this is all about lawfare. We're going to keep speaking out with our election platforms and these machine companies and their affiliates that run our government. They run our elections.

And if you can't question them, it'd be like you all have a bank account where you can't go question your own bank account.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: CNN senior correspondent Donie O'Sullivan is joining us now.

Donie, Lindell says he will appeal and seems to be doubling down on his voting machine conspiracy theories.

DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN BUSINESS POLITICS AND TECHNOLOGY REPORTER: That's right, Wolf.

Yes, I mean, look, this is notable here because this is the first time Mike Lindell has had to face a jury in this whole election saga. But, really, you're not seeing him learn the lesson as such that some might have thought that he might have taken from this case, which is maybe he should stop spreading election conspiracy theories.

And just to bring you back a small bit, this case has been going on for quite some time. And in the deposition, in Lindell's deposition before this case went to trial, things got a little bit heated when it came to pillows. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I'm not asking about the lumpy pillow calls.

LINDELL: No, they're not lumpy pillows. That's not what they call on, OK? When you say lumpy pillows, now you're an ass (EXPLETIVE DELETED). You got that? You're an ass (EXPLETIVE DELETED) is what you are.

(CROSSTALK)

LINDELL: No, he's an ass (EXPLETIVE DELETED). He's an ambulance chasing ass (EXPLETIVE DELETED).

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'SULLIVAN: Now, and then, as you heard there in the clip you played at the top of this segment, Lindell says he will appeal.

And he's also viewing this, trying to spin this as a victory in some ways, given that he has to pay out a relative small amount compared to what Eric Coomer was looking for in this case. But we were in Denver a couple of weeks ago as this trial was starting. And I asked Lindell if he was -- if a jury ruled against him, as they now have, if it would make him reconsider it all, his yearslong crusade of election denialism. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O'SULLIVAN: If this jury sides with Eric Coomer, will it give you pause? Will it give you a moment where you say, hmm, maybe I'm wrong about this election stuff?

LINDELL: Never. I'm not wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'SULLIVAN: And really sums up the determination, I guess, of many election conspiracy theorists like Mike Lindell.

I think also what is notable here is that clip we played at the very beginning of the segment where Lindell was speaking outside the court yesterday, he was actually speaking live on what is called LindellTV, his video streaming service online, specifically actually appearing live on "The Rudy Giuliani Show."

[11:45:08]

That is where the New York -- the former New York mayor is now. And I think that really just points to another big aspect of all of this. Since the 2020 election, we have seen such a new infrastructure and ecosystem of alternative and specifically MAGA media.

And so really the likes of Lindell can continue to peddle their message absolutely every day to thousands, if not millions of people online.

BROWN: Yes, which is concerning, given that, especially when it comes to the election and those -- conspiracy, it's lies. It's not true. It's not backed up by facts and evidence.

Donie O'Sullivan, thank you so much.

And coming up right here in THE SITUATION ROOM: the potential dangers of the teen skin care craze on TikTok. How some viral videos can be harmful and costly.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:50:24]

BROWN: Well, if there are two things teenagers are into, I think it's safe to say they would be TikTok and healthy skin.

But a new study shows that the skin care craze on the platform could actually be harmful.

The author of that study joins us now, Dr. Molly Hales, a dermatologist at Northwestern's Feinberg School of Medicine.

Doctor, thank you so much for coming on.

So, just first off, help us understand, what are teens doing and why could it be so dangerous?

DR. MOLLY HALES, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY FEINBERG SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: Yes, thanks for having me on.

So teens are really into skin care today, and a lot of the time they're getting their information from social media with videos that are being posted and shared from one girl to another. So, in our study, we were interested in seeing what kinds of routines are actually being posted and shared on some of these most popular social media sites, and what are the potential risks and benefits of the routines that are being demonstrated?

BROWN: And so tell us more about the findings.

HALES: We found that these content creators, including some that were still in elementary school, were posting routines that were quite complicated, time-consuming, and very expensive.

So the average video showed six different products being applied at once, with a total average cost of $168. And that was an average. So some featured over a dozen products with a total price tag of upwards of $500.

BROWN: Wow.

HALES: And then we also found that these products and combinations posed risks to young skin. And so they were often very irritating to the skin. They also put kids at risk of developing allergies to some of those inactive ingredients in the products.

And in many cases, they increased sun sensitivity. Unfortunately, very few of them included a sunscreen. And so that's another missed opportunity in these videos.

BROWN: So TikTok has responded and noted that minors below the age of 13 are not allowed on the platform, and that beauty regiments are common across social media.

And it sounds like, from your study, you found people using this or following the videos that were younger than 13, even though the platform is not for users under that age. So what do you do? I mean, it's so prevalent across social media, these instructional videos that these teens and, in some cases, really young girls are latching on to.

HALES: It's true. It's very prevalent.

And, I mean, having watched 100 -- more than 100 of these videos myself, I can see the appeal. There's a really kind of fun, confidant tone to the videos. You are taking into these girls' bedrooms. You get to kind of sit with them while they're doing their morning routine. We don't want to be censoring that kind of content, but it's worth noting the risks of the products.

And I think it's also important that girls don't get the message that this is healthy or that what they're doing is taking care of themselves, because, in most cases, the products, because of irritation, sun sensitivity, they're not increasing the health of the skin. They're probably taking away from the health of the skin.

And we certainly don't want girls to feel like they need to be devoting 45 minutes of their morning and hundreds of dollars to try to improve their health, when, really, these are more about the pursuit of a beauty ideal that's often unrealistic and unattainable, frankly.

BROWN: So what is your advice to parents then who might be concerned about this?

HALES: So I would say -- I would have kind of two-pronged advice.

On the one hand, it's a great opportunity to open up a conversation with your kids about what kind of content they're seeing on social media and how they can be savvy consumers of that content, understanding some of the risks and benefits, deciding whether or not that's something they want to take up and imitate.

And then, as a dermatologist, I would also say, parents, you can do a lot in just checking what your kids are using, what's in the products and using some best practices in what kids are putting on their skin. If you're using active ingredients, kids really should be using no more than one active ingredient at once. And that's a maximum.

Avoiding added fragrance can be one really easy way to reduce the risk of developing a skin allergy, because, once you develop that kind of allergy, it can be lifelong. And then, finally, sun protection is so important. It's really -- sunscreen is really the only product that we recommend in this age group, unless you have a skin condition.

So if girls are getting excited about spending time in the morning doing a skin care routine, then that's a great opportunity to get plugged into using sunscreen every day. And there's lots of great sunscreen products out there. Sunscreen can reduce the risk of skin cancer.

[11:55:02]

And so that's a great opportunity to use this genre to open up that conversation as well.

BROWN: All right, Dr. Molly Hales, thank you so much.

HALES: Thank you.

BROWN: And thank you all for joining us this morning. You can keep up with us on social media @WolfBlitzer and @PamelaBrownCNN. We will see you back here tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. Eastern.

BLITZER: And Dana Bash will be speaking live with Israel's ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, on "INSIDE POLITICS." That's coming up next, right after a short break.