Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
High-Stakes Primaries Underway In Six States; Supreme Court Allows Alabama To Use GOP-Friendly House Map; Sanders Pushes Plan To Give Public 50 Percent Stake In AI Companies. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired June 02, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
DAVID AXELROD, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA: And these elections are always a referendum on the man in the White House. So, you combine all these factors. Iowa was going to be tough. It's not going to be an easy race.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Yes.
AXELROD: But Democrats have a good candidate for governor there, and--
VAN JONES, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: We shouldn't even be talking about Iowa. I mean, given what you're saying--
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, that's -- that--
JONES: --and we are because, of what David's saying.
COOPER: We're out of time. Everyone, thanks.
Our coverage of Election Night in America continues.
"THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now. I'll see you tomorrow.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: And good evening. I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is CNN's special coverage of Primary Election Night in America.
We are tracking several key races across six states tonight that will test the direction of not only the Democratic Party, but also as it is fighting to regain control of Congress this November.
As we await results in New Jersey. Right now, polls are closing in Iowa, New Mexico, and South Dakota.
And in two hours, polls will close in California, where the race for governor is up for grabs. Dozens of candidates, and I mean dozens, are vying to replace Governor Gavin Newsom, whose term is up, and that includes the state Attorney General, Xavier Becerra, and the billionaire activist, Tom Steyer. Only the top two people, though, in that race will advance to the general election, this November. And right now, polls are suggesting that one of them could be President Trump-backed Republican Steve Hilton. Now that's coming as Republican Spencer Pratt as -- who was a former reality TV star, has also shaken up the mayor's race in deep-blue Los Angeles, where the current mayor, Karen Bass, is fending off a progressive challenger.
Tonight, we are also keeping a close eye on the State of New Jersey, where Democrats are deciding who will go up against a Republican congressman who right now has been missing from Capitol Hill for nearly three months.
I want to get straight to CNN Anchor and Chief National Correspondent, John King, who is at the Magic Wall for us tonight, where he always is on these big election nights.
John, what are we seeing in New Jersey so far tonight?
JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Kaitlan, we now know who the Democratic challenger will be in that district you're talking about.
Let me come over to New Jersey here, and pop right up here into the 7th district. CNN has just projected that Rebecca Bennett, a former military helicopter pilot, the favorite of the Democratic establishment there, Democrats and even Republicans privately, we can see, they believe she's the best candidate in this race. You see, with about half of the vote in, she's getting 48 percent, if you round that up. Two challengers down there.
This is one of many races in this cycle across the country where we've seen so-called mischief money. Republicans who knew that she would be a better candidate, spent some money trying to support her rivals.
But we've just projected now Rebecca Bennett will win this race. And you mentioned the Congressman she'll be running against. That's Tom Kean Jr. He was unopposed in the primary. As you noted, he has not been in Washington since March, missed more than a 100 votes. His campaign says he has an illness. And more information is coming. But there's growing anxiety in the Republican Party. This was going to be a battleground race anyway. Kean trying to hold on to that seat. Bennett -- Rebecca Bennett will now be his opponent.
The Democrats are going to have to pick up about a dozen seats now because of redistricting, probably, to get the majority. This one is high in their list, and the Democrats think tonight they've nominated their best candidate.
COLLINS: Well, speaking of who Democrats think is their best candidate. I mean, we're all watching this California governor's race that has been absolutely wild, that's been playing out. Those polls close in about two hours.
What's your sense of how it's shaping up as voters are casting their ballots?
KING: So, this one, for a lot of people around the country, is sort of a bit of a head-shaker, right? It's called the jungle primary, an open primary. In most states, you have a Democratic primary and a Republican party -- primary.
California, one of the states that says everybody runs in one primary, and the top two make it to the general election. So, you see Democrats, you see some Republicans, there are Independents in this race. We're trying to see the results there. This one has been a big drama. You had Eric Swalwell dropped out of the race because of scandal. He was the frontrunner at that point when he did that. So, you're trying to find two.
And you noted at the top of the program, California is a blue state. It will remain a blue state. However, it's had Democratic leadership for a long time. Is that frustration enough to elect a Republican? First, one of these Republicans would have to make the ballot.
Polls have shown the Fox -- former Fox News host, Steve Hilton, is competitive for that.
Xavier Becerra, the former Biden administration Cabinet member, he was the Attorney General in California previously, he's been in the polls.
Tom Steyer, remember, he ran for president in 2020, a billionaire, spending a lot of his own money, he's risen in the polls.
Some people think it will be Steyer, Becerra. Some people think it will be Becerra, Hilton. Some people think maybe Steyer jumps one of them. This is why we count votes. A couple hours away from that.
But just a quick reminder. Gavin Newsom, term limited, can't run for re-election. He got 59 percent last time to 41 percent for then- Republican state senator Brian Dahle. So, California has been a blue state for a long time. But in a year we're talking about voter frustration, most of that is anti-Trump, most of that is because of the affordability crisis, we'll see if some of that kicks California Democrats because they've been in power a long time.
COLLINS: Yes, we'll be watching it very closely.
KING: Right.
COLLINS: John King at the Magic Wall. Thank you for that.
[21:05:00]
And as we await for more results from the Magic Wall. Here in Washington today, the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, appeared before Congress and confirmed that the Justice Department has abandoned that proposed $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund, after intense backlash.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TODD BLANCHE, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: We're not moving forward with the fund.
We are not moving forward with the fund. Period.
We are not moving forward with the fund.
REP. GRACE MENG (D-NY): Not moving forward ever?
BLANCHE: Correct. So, yes.
We're not moving forward with the fund.
We're not moving forward with the fund.
We're not moving forward with the fund.
MENG: OK.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That fund was created as part of a deal to settle President Trump's lawsuit against the IRS. But as you heard the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, testifying there, that they believe nothing has changed when it comes to the settlement term that bars the IRS from bringing claims against President Trump, his family, or their businesses, for past tax issues.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLANCHE: Any time the IRS settles with an individual taxpayer or another company as part of the settlement, it's standard, it's typical for to get rid of past ongoing audits. It's not a forward-looking document. It's nothing that gives any sort of immunity, in the future, to the President, or his family, or his organizations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: As we heard from the acting Attorney General, as he testified. He also, at one point, refused to put anything in writing when it comes to the future of that $1.8 billion fund, even though it was pointed out that the nearly $1.8 billion fund was announced in writing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MENG: Are you going to issue a new memo in writing, rescinding that May 18th memo?
BLANCHE: I'm not committing to putting anything in writing. I've said it today over and over again.
MENG: Nothing in writing. OK.
BLANCHE: I mean, I don't know what the purpose of putting something in writing. I'm telling you what we're doing, meaning like, what's the -- why do I need to put something in writing, if I'm telling you what we're doing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Joining me tonight is Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, who I should note is running unopposed in tonight's primary for reelection.
So you're not sweating the Magic Wall results, as some other lawmakers are. When it comes to this fund, is what you heard from the Attorney General today -- the acting Attorney General, enough?
SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ): No, it's not. How many times have they told us one thing and done another? We've seen this administration lie over and over and over again. Unless we pass legislation, stopping this, I don't trust that the Trump administration might not pick this up and change their mind later down the road.
And the thought, not only of having this smash-and-grab sleaze fund, but also having a immunity to any past legitimate crimes that you committed, for you or your family, is something no American gets, and that too is ridiculous, that he's still trying to defend that.
COLLINS: So, you think that Congress needs to put an amendment on what you're voting on, what the Senate is going to be voting on this week, it looks like, saying that this fund can't go forward?
BOOKER: I think we are going to push that amendment, as Democrats, force Republicans to vote on it, who know that this president does things that are corrupt and that they need to restrain him. Will they do that? I don't know. Because this is the president who seems to get away with things because the Republican Party is refusing to check him or to prevent him from doing it.
COLLINS: Does it make sense on if the fund itself is not moving forward, which is part of the settlement, why the addendum barring anything being brought against the President for his past audits, basically, why that makes sense if that holds?
BOOKER: It's a simple principle we all agree on in America. No one is above the law. The President and his family seem to want special rules to apply to them. It makes no sense that this is included. That is unjust, and we need to stop it.
COLLINS: The acting Attorney General, obviously, is commenting on this, after a federal judge in Florida got involved here and is basically threatening to reopen all of this.
Do you think the federal judge will end up killing this part of the agreement, this fund, and the part about the IRS not being able to look into what he did, the President, or his business, or his kids?
BOOKER: Yes, this is a settlement that comes from Donald Trump being on both sides of this equation, controlling the government and being the party, the so-called aggrieved party. It's an unjust settlement, and it makes no sense, and the judge should stop it altogether by law.
COLLINS: The other news that we learned today is that the President is making the acting Director of National Intelligence, which is the official in the Cabinet who oversees the 18 intelligence agencies in the nation, to Bill Pulte.
And he may not be a household name for people, but he was -- right now, basically running the President's Housing and has been the person who's kind of been leading the charge against Tish James, Adam Schiff, all these other lawmakers who have faced scrutiny over their own mortgages and home insurance.
Do you believe that Bill Pulte is qualified for that job?
BOOKER: No. I mean, it is comical. He has no national security experience or intelligence experience whatsoever.
[21:10:00]
The law -- remember, this position came out of 9/11, where the law explicitly says that they should have extensive, they shall have extensive national security experience. He has absolutely none. Those of us who know, the failures in intelligence that allowed 9/11 to happen should not allow him to do that. It's against the law. He's not qualified.
Donald Trump continues to put up non-serious people who are unqualified, and their only qualification is they serve to do his bidding to go after his perceived enemies. This is a man who has opened up investigations, from his position, against legislators or anyone he thinks are Donald Trump's enemies. And that, to me, is a crony. It's not somebody who will protect our country.
COLLINS: Do you believe that's why the President put him in this position?
BOOKER: Absolutely. It's the reason why Todd Blanche is in the position he is in right now. His former attorney. The serious positions that protect our nation are being filled of unqualified people whose only qualification is allegiance to Trump and willing to do his dirty work. His slush fund--
COLLINS: Well, Todd Blanche was an attorney, and he did get confirmed to the Deputy Attorney General role.
I think, for Bill Pulte, I mean, he's named to this also in an acting capacity, which means the Senate doesn't have a say-so on it right now.
BOOKER: Well, I appreciate your distinction. It's an acting capacity. The Senate has advice and consent rules.
And so, will the Republicans in the Senate take somebody who has absolutely no national security experience, in one of the most important public safety positions there are, will they put someone who is clearly a crony of the President, into that position? That, to me, even imagining that, is unacceptable and delegitimizes their party and this president. This is a president that's not making us safe, and this is a glaring example of how dangerous this man is.
COLLINS: Some people might hear what you said about this and say, Well, he's a Democrat, of course he doesn't like the President's picks.
I want you to listen to what your Republican colleagues had to say about Bill Pulte today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Is he the kind of person you want leading the intelligence community?
SEN. JOHN THUNE (R-SD): I'll defer to the Chairman on that.
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): We have four more weeks with Director Gabbard as the DNI, and I look forward to implementing last year's Intelligence Authorization Act with her to implement wide-ranging reforms that will shrink the DNI and take it back to its original intent, to provide a mere coordinator or process role for the intelligence community.
RAJU: And Pulte?
COTTON: I have no observations on the matter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: What did you make of those answers?
BOOKER: I mean, this is what the Republican Party of today is. They are contorting themselves, in some advanced form of yoga, to bend over backwards, to either do what the President says or not even tell the truth about the lack of qualifications of an individual.
This is why that party, who controls our House and Senate right now, which to me has surrendered the public trust and allowed this man to get away with things that no president conceivably could have gotten away with in years past. That party should be thrown out of power in these midterm elections in the House and the Senate.
COLLINS: And you're saying you don't trust Bill Pulte with the nation's secrets?
BOOKER: I think that you will find over the coming -- first of all, it was laughable. There were people in the private conversations, none of us even believed this was true when we first heard the reporting. This is going to be severely--
COLLINS: Were any of those people Republicans?
BOOKER: Yes. This will be--
COLLINS: Republicans on the Hill were laughing about this decision?
BOOKER: Time and time again, I hear Republicans will say the quiet part in private but not in public, on many of the unqualified positions, from Hegseth to Pulte. We do not have serious people running our military, running our intelligence, running the Department of Justice, and my -- both parties know it because, we've seen qualified people from past presidents.
This is ridiculous that we're even having a serious conversation about a man that comes from the Housing background, who has no experience in national intelligence, being the key position that's supposed to be coordinating, gathering intelligence agencies to prevent terrorist attacks in our country. It is ridiculous.
COLLINS: Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, was also on Capitol Hill today. You had an exchange about the war in Iran.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: Iran has no navy left, they've lost a substantial percentage of their defense industrial base, that -- Iran has lost a substantial percentage of their missile launchers, and their economy is far worse today, and I mean far worse today, than it was six to nine months ago. And they are looking at hundreds of billions of dollars of reconstruction costs just to get to where they were six months ago.
BOOKER: Mr. Rubio, you keep telling us how we're winning this war.
The President keeps saying, completely annihilated.
RUBIO: Well, the war is over now.
BOOKER: The war is not over.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: He says, the war is over. You say, it's not. Do you agree with him, though, that Iran is in a weaker position because of the war?
BOOKER: Their navy is degraded. Their air force is degraded. But as we see, as they continue to launch attacks on our regional allies, and the United States, as they're holding the Strait of Hormuz right now. And clearly, they overstated the amount of damage they did to missile launches and more.
This is a stalemate that we're in right now. The most powerful country on the planet, the United States of America, is in a stalemate with Iran, who still has military capabilities.
We have not won this war. This war is not over. We still have military personnel that are at risk. We're still spending billions of dollars a day in conducting these war operations, and the people that are paying for it, beyond the tragic loss of 14 soldiers and the hundreds injured, is the American people every day at the pump.
[21:15:00]
That -- I know Marco Rubio. I don't know what happened to him when he became Secretary of State. It's like he has Stockholm syndrome, that he's doing whatever his hostage keeper or the President of the United States, is telling him to do, and telling him to say.
It is a complete lie, what he said. This war is not over. We are actually doing something that is literally the definition of an act of war, which is an embargo of this -- of Iran. So, again, non-serious people in important positions that are not telling the truth, all while the American people are paying the costs for it. This has got to end.
And you started with saying, the primary -- the primary is over. I'm going to lead the ticket, we're going to take back the House, starting it in New Jersey, I'm going to be running around the country, and I hope people will go to corybooker.com and make contributions, so I can fight this fight. The Republicans should not control the House and the Senate. We need checks and balances and oversight on this President.
COLLINS: Senator Cory Booker, thank you for joining us tonight.
BOOKER: Thank you very much.
COLLINS: Appreciate your time.
BOOKER: Up next. My political panel is going to join me, as we are waiting to see who those final two candidates in the race to replace Gavin Newsom as governor of California are going to be, and who comes out on top in that highly-contested Los Angeles mayor's race.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:20:00]
COLLINS: It is Election Night here in America, where several high- stakes primaries are underway in six states this evening.
California is home to some of the biggest races that we are watching right now. That's because voters in the Golden State are making their choice in the gubernatorial primary to replace Gavin Newsom. In Los Angeles, voters are going to be deciding who is going to be competing this November to be the city's next mayor.
And across the state, there are House primaries using a new congressional map that aims to help Democrats flip as many as five Republican seats and to retake control of the House of Representatives here in Washington.
My excellent political sources are here with me, including Dana Bash.
And Dana, obviously, what's Democrats' best-case scenario, you think, in this crazy governor's race that's been playing out?
DANA BASH, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it depends who you ask and what you mean by best-case scenario because, obviously, if they want a Democrat in the governor's mansion, it's two Democrats because, then you're definitely going to get a Democrat in there.
But because of the other dynamics, including what you just mentioned, the fact that in November you have the down-ballot races, including like a handful that could help determine who's going to control the House of Representatives here, there are a lot of people gaming out what would be best. And their -- most of the people I talk to, their theory is -- these are Democrats in California, is that it would be best to have a Democrat and a Republican. Hear me out here because -- because if you have a Democrat versus Democrat, they'll bloody each other up, and the Democratic voters will be like, Forget it, I'm not going to the polls, and then that could hurt the Democrats on the ballot for the House. If there's a Democrat versus a Republican, it could change that dynamic.
But the truth is, these are all games being played, and sort of war games, if you will because, of the nature of this completely unorthodox system in California.
COLLINS: Yes.
I mean, how are you watching this, as our Democrat here at the table?
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, PUBLISHER, THE ROOT, WHITE HOUSE SENIOR POLICY ADVISER UNDER PRES. OBAMA, NATIONAL COALITIONS DIRECTOR, BIDEN-HARRIS 2020 CAMPAIGN: I think Democrats should want two Democrats to win, like let's--
BASH: Right.
ALLISON: --let's make life a little easier, sometimes, and not always try and find the steepest hill to victory.
But I do think you're right. If Becerra and Tom Steyer, which are most likely the two Democrats that will be there, that is a very interesting race though because -- and I think that actually would activate parts of the Democratic coalition that would help down ballot.
Because people, there's like progressive flank that is actually supporting Tom Steyer, that folks were really surprised of because, he is a billionaire, he is self-funding this campaign.
And then Becerra, even people from the Biden administration have been extremely critical of him, of not being effective in that role as HHS Secretary.
So, it could be an interesting race. I do think, though, two Dems should proceed. That's the best math for Democrats. You, as a Democrat, going into 2028, you do not want a Republican to win California. That would send reverberations in our political map that I just don't think you want to even risk taking.
DAVID URBAN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN ADVISER: Yes, but you have to admit, if you look at that, if you look at your Democratic slate in California, it is not a bunch of A- listers. It is a -- it's the JV squad that's all around--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: Yes, it's been a -- it's been a tough race.
URBAN: --governor. ALLISON: Yes.
COLLINS: I mean, we -- Elex and I moderated the debate, and it was crazy just--
URBAN: Yes.
ALLISON: Yes.
COLLINS: You know, there were so many people first on stage.
But standby, David because, I want to get your thoughts.
But also, I want to go back to John King at the Magic Wall because we have an update on the races in Iowa tonight.
KING: Kaitlan, this is another state that Democrats think might possibly be in play this year, largely because they think they have a competitive gubernatorial candidate. But the Senate race is also in play, and could come into the math. Can Democrats take back the Senate? They'd have to win some red states to do it. Iowa would be one of them.
One thing we can tell you right now, definitively, is CNN has now projected that Congresswoman Ashley Hinson, she's a Republican congresswoman, her district's over here in Northeast Iowa, she will be the Republican nominee for Senate.
You see the results, it's early results, but this is a runaway so far, 76 percent. Ashley Hinson, even Democrats will tell you, even in this year, where you have a tough anti-Republican, anti-Trump, anti- Washington dynamic, she's a strong candidate in this race.
Who will the Democratic opponent be? That is the question. In the early results, Josh Turek, he represents a district over here in the legislature. He's at 64 percent. Zach Wahls, he represents a district in the legislature over here in Eastern Iowa, he is in second place. Only 20 percent of the vote count in here.
[21:25:00]
This has been a fascinating race because of the internal -- you are talking about California -- the internal Democratic dynamics.
Josh Turek has the support of Chuck Schumer, has the support of their Democratic establishment, and a lot of money has gone in to help him in this race.
Zach Wahls, just a couple hours ago on CNN said if he wins this race, he will not support Chuck Schumer in the Democratic leadership. He thinks there needs to be a new generation and new faces.
So, that's what primaries are about, right? Settling internal family feuds. So, on the Democratic side, we're still waiting to see who the candidate would be. Josh Turek, at the moment, opening a comfortable lead with just 20 percent of the vote, so we got some counting to do. COLLINS: All right, John King, we'll let you keep counting at the Magic Wall.
David Urban, when you look at these, what's happening in Iowa tonight, what do you -- what do you make of that?
URBAN: Yes, listen, so full disclosure, I gave Ashley Hinson a lot of money, I think she's fantastic. I think she's going to win.
COLLINS: OK.
URBAN: Well I'm just -- well, full disclosure, I just want to make people know that not only am I a Republican, but I'm a supporter.
COLLINS: We appreciate the honesty here.
ALLISON: Yes.
URBAN: Like Hair Club for Men.
ALLISON: Bankrolling campaign--
(CROSSTALK)
URBAN: Listen, I think she's a really formidable candidate. If you're Democrats, that's a state that's going to be really hard to flip, despite the competitive governor's race. Ashley Hinson, the great House member, she could be a great senator from the State of Iowa. She's been to all 99 counties, she's a real campaigner, a grinder. So, I think that's--
COLLINS: Yes.
URBAN: --I think that's going to be a tough -- tough seat to flip.
COLLINS: I mean, on the Democratic side, it's really interesting to see these candidates saying, one saying, I've got Chuck Schumer's support, and the other saying, I don't want him as leader if I win this seat.
BASH: Yes because it is -- the way that -- there's so many questions about the Democratic Party, and how candidates in various races are playing.
In this particular race, Democrat versus Democrat, it's outsider, it's somebody who is more institutionalist, or at least perceived that way because, Turek has gotten support from VoteVets. He's not a vet, but the thinking here, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, is because that's what Chuck Schumer wanted. He wanted an outside group to come in and help Turek because, he feels that Turek is a better candidate, which is why you have the other.
But it's a big question whether whomever wins is going to be able to beat Ashley Hinson--
URBAN: Yes. BASH: --because she is considered a very good candidate.
URBAN: Here's a little preview.
COLLINS: Yes.
URBAN: No. That's the answer. No.
COLLINS: OK. We'll see if David Urban is right. At least he is honest, we know.
Up next. We do have some breaking news here on THE SOURCE. Just in, from the Supreme Court, a major redistricting ruling has just come in tonight with major implications for these midterm elections. More right after this.
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: We are getting some breaking news from the Supreme Court on this Election Night in America that is very pertinent to what is happening right now. That's because the court has just ruled that the State of Alabama is now allowed to use a congressional map from 2023 that will benefit Republicans in this year's midterm elections. This ruling tonight means that Alabama will lose one of its two majority black districts that are right now currently represented by black Democratic members of Congress.
My political sources are back with me, along with my legal source, Elie Honig.
And Elie. I mean, obviously I'm from Alabama. This has caused so much confusion where candidates have had to qualify multiple times for the primaries. There's been multiple dates for these primaries. Now that the Supreme Court is coming down with this ruling, what stands out to you?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: Well, Kaitlan, so heading into tonight, Alabama had a map where of the seven congressional districts in Alabama, two of those had been drawn to be majority black Democrat- leaning districts. However, now as a result of this decision, that's going to go down to one.
And this is all based off of the Louisiana Supreme Court opinion that came down in late April. In that opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court said, the states can essentially draw congressional lines for whatever political reasons they want. They cannot, however, consider race either way in drawing those lines.
So, the State of Alabama took that opinion and said, OK, we now want to undraw one of those majority black districts and go from two down to one. And in tonight's opinion, the Supreme Court, in a six to three split, the six conservatives in the majority, the three liberals in the dissent said, It's OK, Alabama, you can go ahead and do that. So the net-net out of the end of this is that Alabama will go from two majority black Democratic-leaning districts down to one.
And I should note, Kaitlan, the dissent here is quite impassioned. It comes from the three liberal justices, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson. At one point they call the court's action, quote, Unconscionable. They say that it tramples on the rights of black Alabamans to be represented with their votes.
But this is the new reality in the court. Ever since that Louisiana case came down, there have been this -- this is the next in a long line of domino effects, and one seat will probably swing as a result of this.
COLLINS: Elie Honig.
My panel is also back here with me.
I mean, just seeing how this has played out ever since it started in Texas, now watching this play out with the Supreme Court decision, shows you just how chaotic this has been, in terms of at least the maps and where everything stands.
BASH: So chaotic, a total roller coaster, really, for both parties, as this sort of year and a half, almost two years now, of the push for mid-decade redistricting.
This, of course, is a different issue because, as Elie was saying, and you were discussing, this is based on a Supreme Court ruling that sort of negates a big part of the Voting Rights Act.
[21:35:00]
And I was just thinking about your home state in Alabama. I was there with John Lewis, in Selma and with -- the place where he was almost killed by police officers who were trying to push back on his and others' march to get the right to vote. And I remember being there with him and him talking about how precarious it was.
And now if this plays out the way we think it's going to play out, that part of Alabama, in Selma, is probably going to be the only one that has a majority black district, and then a Representative.
ALLISON: Yes, and I will just say that the district that they are most likely going to separate is a new district. This is a district that just was created. I actually donated to the candidate that won that -- in the spirit of--
BASH: Just for the record, I've donated to--
(CROSSTALK)
URBAN: There we go.
ALLISON: But it's important because it's not a district. It is actually Montgomery. It is a -- when people think of the South, they have this image that it is predominantly white. There are a lot of black rural people in the South, there are a lot of black people in the South, and there are a lot of black people in Alabama.
And what this is doing, gutting the voting rights out, it is just another attack on black voting power. They start -- they did it in Tennessee. And quite honestly, what they did in Texas, they -- that was -- there was the underpinning of that. They were disaggregating districts, with predominantly black folks in it, to give more Latino voters in those districts because they thought Latinos were going to be going more Republican.
And so, in Texas, and Virginia, they attempted in South Carolina, and Alabama, and Georgia. And in my home state of Ohio, there are all these tactics to eliminate black power and black voting power, which is -- you said John Lewis. That's -- he was alive. We knew John Lewis. We worked with John Lewis. And so, the history of what is happening from the civil rights movement is very present today, and people need to be aware of them.
COLLINS: David.
URBAN: Yes, and so, look, you experience this completely differently than I do, obviously, so.
But my question is, is it better to have one district that's a 100 percent African American voting bloc, or a district that has maybe 30 percent made up of African Americans, and -- or 40 percent or 50 percent?
And then so that district, African -- you may have two districts that have 50 percent African Americans now, maybe more responsive than an all-white district, right, that's carved out specifically, right, that it doesn't have to pay attention to African Americans as much.
I know, like, there's districts in Pennsylvania that have disproportionately high African American votes, right? That if you're a white candidate, you better be courting the African American vote in those districts. You can't ignore them.
ALLISON: Well if you're a--
(CROSSTALK)
URBAN: And so, I think--
ALLISON: --candidate you should court the African American vote.
URBAN: No, no but -- but you understand what I'm saying that you have a -- you still a very powerful voting bloc.
COLLINS: Yes.
URBAN: You're not going to zero. So African Americans may still have 30 or 40 percent of the voting bloc in those districts and still have a great deal of political power. ALLISON: Yes, but that seat -- the seat that we're talking about in Alabama was drawn, it was actually drawn after the Supreme Court ruled on a court case in 2003. And so, this is just a part of a bigger political--
(CROSSTALK)
URBAN: But at least they're not--
COLLINS: Yes, safe to say.
URBAN: --it's not going to be diluted though. It's still going to have the same--
ALLISON: Maybe.
URBAN: OK.
COLLINS: We'll see what happens.
David Urban. Ashley.
Dana. Great to have you here at night. Love that.
BASH: Thank you.
COLLINS: Everyone. Thank you for that. For the breaking news.
We're also watching what's happening in Maine. Their election is not tonight, but their Senate candidate, Graham Platner, was up here on Capitol Hill today, as his campaign is facing another scandal. One of his biggest backers in the Senate, that is Bernie Sanders, is going to join me here on set next.
[21:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: At the White House today, and behind closed doors, President Trump signed an executive order, asking artificial intelligence companies to give his administration access to new models, 30 days before they launch. That's when the government can check for things like cybersecurity risks. And it's not mandatory.
But it also comes after a previous version of that executive order that was supposed to be signed publicly almost two weeks ago didn't happen. The ceremony was actually canceled at the last minute. What was signed today is different from a previous draft that my CNN colleagues saw. That's one that asked for a 90-day review period. But still, today's order is a shift from the President's mostly hands-off approach to the AI industry.
And it comes as here, in the Senate, on Capitol Hill, Senator Bernie Sanders has just announced plans to introduce a new bill that would give the government a direct ownership stake in the largest American AI companies. Senator Sanders is my source tonight.
And thank you, Senator, for being here.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT): Thank you for having me.
COLLINS: We see what the President signed today.
Regarding your legislation. Can you explain how this would work if the federal government owned half of these AI companies?
SANDERS: Well, I think the concern all over the country about AI is that it is being -- it is owned and directed by a handful of the wealthiest people in the world, Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, and those guys, and nobody believes that they have the welfare of the American people at heart. They want to get richer and even more powerful.
So, the question is, should we allow a handful of oligarchs to determine literally the future of humanity? AI is going to be the most transformational technology in the history of the world.
So, what my legislation will do are several major things. Number one, it says that because the foundation of AI is based on all human knowledge, all right? AI will absorb what this program is about, the five books that I read, all the poets, all the scientific work. That's what AI is about. OK? People who contribute to that deserve some of the wealth that is being created.
[21:45:00]
More importantly, we cannot allow just a handful of oligarchs to determine the future. If we have 50 percent of public ownership of these companies, we can say no to ideas that will lead to mass unemployment, invasion of privacy, endangerment of children's health, or maybe even an existential threat to the planet, if AI becomes independent of human knowledge--
COLLINS: Why do you need to take control of them? Why can't you just regulate them, tax them, as is current, if any of it happens?
SANDERS: Well, for two reasons. Number one, I think having -- this is, again, this is the most transformational technology in history, and it is based on human knowledge. So, human beings deserve to be compensated for what they put into AI. Second of all, we need to determine the future. Can't just be a handful of billionaires. That's why.
COLLINS: I mean, when you look at this, in terms of how this works, some of these companies might just see this and say, If this legislation passes, I'm just going to move my company to another country.
SANDERS: Well, that's the same -- but that's what they're saying in California about a wealth tax. I mean, that's a whole other issue.
COLLINS: But you would have deciding power here, the government would--
SANDERS: Yes, we decide -- we think--
COLLINS: --in these companies, if this passed.
SANDERS: I think, and I think most Americans agree, that the future of humanity should not be determined by a handful of the wealthiest people on earth. That the public in a democratic process should have impact -- input into the way the world is going to move.
COLLINS: And also, you talked about the American people deserving part of the profits from this, part of the money from this.
The President has signed an executive order about creating a sovereign wealth fund for the United States.
SANDERS: Yes.
COLLINS: I mean, that's what you're suggesting here. The Trump administration also has equity now, equity stakes in, I think, more than 20 private companies.
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: How is what you're doing different than what President Trump is doing?
SANDERS: Well, it is -- it is radically different. And, by the way, the idea of a sovereign wealth fund is not a radical idea. As you know, Norway has a fund based on their oil revenue of over $2 trillion.
COLLINS: But from their revenues. Not from--
SANDERS: From their revenues. Well--
COLLINS: They don't have a controlling stake in the actual companies.
SANDERS: Right. Right. And Alaska, by the way, the State of Alaska, also has a sovereign wealth fund where they distribute money based on oil revenue as well.
But oil is a natural resource, and so is human labor. All of the contributions that humanity has made into AI deserves to be compensated, and people deserve to get that wealth redistributed back to them.
COLLINS: But is this an area where you see agreement with the President?
SANDERS: Well, the President says a whole lot of stuff. I happen not to trust much what he says.
COLLINS: But I'm talking about sovereign wealth fund, controlling interests.
SANDERS: The concept of a sovereign wealth fund is not a radical idea. It exists. I think there are at least a 100 of them around the world.
Again, bottom line is people have -- the foundation of AI is the knowledge that human beings have contributed. We deserve to be compensated. Second of all, we need to put brakes on AI, when it leads to mass unemployment, endangering children's health, et cetera.
COLLINS: When you look at this. If this plan existed right now, if this legislation went through and passed. You know, what you have described, this technology that you've said is a threat to everything the American people hold dear, I believe was your exact quote. I mean, the President and Republican majorities would have deciding factors in these companies.
SANDERS: I know -- that's true. But on the other hand, that is democracy. And I hope very much that President Trump and the Republicans will not be in power for that much longer. But at the end of the day--
COLLINS: But I'm just saying, if it passed tomorrow--
SANDERS: Well, all right. So, the question is, do we want democratic control or do we want Mr. Musk and a handful of billionaires to make those decisions? I prefer the democracy, where people still can have impact on Republicans, on Mr. Trump. You can't have that impact on these CEOs of these large corporations.
COLLINS: Sam Altman is going to be in Washington, I believe, tomorrow. He's got meetings lined up, I know, at the White House, I believe, with some of your colleagues. Are you going to be meeting with him?
SANDERS: Yes.
COLLINS: Oh, OK. And are you going to talk to him about your legislation? Who set that meeting up?
SANDERS: He did.
COLLINS: And do you think it was because of this?
SANDERS: Who knows? Well--
COLLINS: What are you going to say to him?
SANDERS: What am I going to say to him? I'll say to him, tomorrow, what I'll say to him but -- I mean, what we will discuss is the need for a moratorium, so that we can have a democratic debate and discussion about the future of AI. Talk about that. We will talk about the need for international cooperation, so that we do not have a super intelligence, super AI created which can escape human control--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: I'm just wondering, what he's going to say when you -- I mean, in your video, announcing your legislation, you said, The time has come to reclaim what has been stolen from us--
SANDERS: Yes.
COLLINS: --since AI is built on the collective knowledge of humanity, the wealth it generates must also benefit humanity, not just Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos--
SANDERS: That's right.
COLLINS: --Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison.
You didn't name Sam Altman there.
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: But I assume he's in that category?
SANDERS: Put him in, yes.
COLLINS: I mean, how do you think he views you saying, Reclaim what was stolen from us?
[21:50:00]
SANDERS: Well, I don't know how he will respond. That is my view. That is the foundation of AI. Your program is going to be part of AI. This discussion is part of AI. Do you think the people in the world who contributed, who created, in a sense, the knowledge, that is AI, deserve to be compensated? I do.
COLLINS: You know, people might watch this and think, That's a really radical idea, in terms of the government having this ownership stake in this.
But I mean, we haven't seen a ton of criticism from Republicans for the President taking these stakes that they've taken in more than 28 (ph) companies.
SANDERS: Well, I think, look, AI is so consequential and so transformational that I think the American people are sitting back and saying, Wait a minute, we cannot just allow these guys to realter society, we have got to have some input in that.
And you are seeing that, Kaitlan, right now, all over this country, in terms of opposition to data centers. And I think, clearly, a significant part of that opposition is people don't want to pay higher electric bills, they're worried about the noise, the environmental impact.
COLLINS: Right.
SANDERS: But I think in the back of people's minds, they're saying, Hey, are my kids going to be able to have any jobs? Are my -- you know, is my daughter going to be hooked up to some AI bots in an emotional relationship? Are millions of jobs going to be wiped out?
People are very worried about AI. They want some input into how it unfolds in the future. COLLINS: So, Sam Altman will be on Capitol Hill tomorrow. You'll be meeting with him. We'll see what happens there.
Graham Platner was on Capitol Hill today, meeting with Senate Democrats. He's obviously been facing some questions about reports that have come out about messages he sent to women, sexually explicit messages, according to The Journal and The New York Times.
You are standing by him, despite that.
SANDERS: Yes.
COLLINS: Why?
SANDERS: Well, I find it interesting. The Republican super PACs have already purchased, as I understand it, $99 million in TV ads against this guy, Graham Platner. In a small state, that is an astronomical sum of money. And more money is going to come in.
So, why do they want to beat Graham Platner? Because they understand that control over the Senate may, in fact, revolve about who wins in Maine, and they want to beat him in the worst possible way.
And I think what the people of this country want are senators now who are going to focus on the needs of working-class people, who are tired of a corrupt political system in which billionaires buy elections, a rigged economy in which the rich get much richer, while 60 percent of our people struggle to put food on the table.
So, I think what the American people are saying right now is, Let's let candidates have the guts to take on a corrupt and broken system, and maybe let's not -- let's understand that nobody is perfect.
COLLINS: There was actually some protests on Capitol Hill about this today.
SANDERS: Paid for by, I believe, the Republican Party.
COLLINS: Well, you walked outside, and this is what happened when you saw those protesters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any comment on the meeting overall?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You support Graham Platner even though you have kids?
SANDERS: Are you with the Republican Party?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It doesn't matter--
SANDERS: Are you talking about morality and corruption with President Trump? Have a nice day.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COLLINS: That was quite a moment.
SANDERS: Well, I mean, I'll tell you, if I may. There was a massive -- there was a mob of media there--
COLLINS: I don't know--
(CROSSTALK)
SANDERS: --mob of media, worried about Graham Platner's marriage and his texts. Meanwhile, we are not talking about why one person in America owns more wealth than the bottom 53 percent. How often do we discuss that on CNN?
COLLINS: Can we talk about both? I mean--
SANDERS: Of course you could talk about both. But I think what people are saying, we are the only major country on earth not to guarantee health care to all people. All right? How often do we talk about that?
COLLINS: But can I ask you on Graham Platner? I mean, I think you can talk about both. I think just because there are major issues doesn't meant you can't talk about--
SANDERS: You can talk about but -- but I have never seen a mob of media interested in whether or not health care--
COLLINS: Well, those were protesters as well, not just reporters.
SANDERS: Pardon me?
COLLINS: Those were protesters as well, not just reporters.
SANDERS: No, but there were a whole lot of reporters there.
COLLINS: But can I ask you--
SANDERS: Yes.
COLLINS: --in terms of Graham Platner himself. You're standing by him?
SANDERS: Yes.
COLLINS: This isn't the only issue that has plagued his campaign. There's also the tattoo, the posts from online.
SANDERS: Well--
COLLINS: Are you worried about anything else coming out about him?
SANDERS: I don't know. All that I can say is, look, I'm sure he's not a saint.
And by the way, let's not forget, he has acknowledged -- this guy served four tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. He went through some very bloody and horrible situations. He has acknowledged that he came back with PTSD. He's had -- he had his share of problems. I just think -- and by the way, I met his wife, Amy, who is a very lovely young woman. She is standing by her husband.
[21:55:00]
And I think it's better for this country that we start focusing on the enormous crises facing working people, a corrupt political system, than spending so much time worrying about the personal life of an individual.
COLLINS: Senator Bernie Sanders, thank you for joining us tonight.
SANDERS: Thank you.
COLLINS: Appreciate your time.
We also have some breaking news on this Election Night in America, as CNN can now project that the State Representative, Josh Turek, will win the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate in Iowa, defeating the State Senator, Zach Wahls, in a hard-fought race that underscored Democratic Party divisions.
Turek is a two-time Paralympic gold medalist in wheelchair basketball, who was born with spina bifida, and he will now face Representative Ashley Hinson, who is projected to win the Republican nomination.
We're following those breaking news on this Election Night in America.
We're also getting major breaking news tonight out of CBS, as Scott Pelley has just been fired from "60 Minutes." Brian Stelter has the termination letter and will join me right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: We have some breaking news here. CNN has now learned that the veteran "60 Minutes" correspondent, Scott Pelley, has been fired.
Brian Stelter joins me now.
Brian Stelter, what do we know about this?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Yes, this is like an underwater earthquake at CBS News. It's not going to be visible on TV right away, but this is bound to have many ripple effects and maybe a legal battle.
Scott Pelley has been a "60 Minutes" correspondent for more than two decades. And tonight, he was fired by CBS News management, one day after he erupted at a staff meeting and said that his current bosses are not qualified for their jobs.
Pelley said yesterday that CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss is quote, murdering "60 Minutes," by firing veteran staffers and hiring a former tech reporter named Nick Bilton to run the show.
Earlier today, Pelley was called in for a meeting with Bilton and Weiss. It's unclear what happened in the meeting. But a few hours later, in fact, just about a few minutes ago, Pelley received a termination letter, and here's part of what it says.
This letter from Bilton says, quote, "You hijacked my first meeting with staff to disparage me, my qualifications, and my intentions with remarkable incivility and contempt." Bilton says, he tried to find a way forward, but you made clear you're not interested in such a path.
The letter says Pelley has been terminated for cause, which means there will probably be a legal battle. Pelley might lawyer up and try to sue CBS. We'll see what happens.
This is incredibly unusual to see a blowup like this, at a major network, with Pelley leaving and concerns about political clouds hovering over CBS News.
[22:00:00]
Bari Weiss and her allies, they say they're trying to move "60 Minutes" into the digital age, trying to reinvent the show that's been an institution on television. But Pelley and others are not going quietly, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Brian Stelter, that is a quite a remarkable development. We'll obviously be following it closely here on CNN. Thank you for bringing us that breaking news.
Thank you all for joining us.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
