Return to Transcripts main page

State of the Union

Leading 2028 Presidential Contenders?; Interview With Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC); Interview With Acting CDC Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired May 10, 2026 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:45]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST (voice-over): Cruise control; 17 Americans on the hantavirus cruise ship are headed home for monitoring.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's very much, we hope, under control.

TAPPER: What's next? Acting CDC Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya joins me next.

Plus: Strike down. Courts deal a one-two punch to Democrats' hopes, sending Republicans racing to redraw their congressional maps.

REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D-SC): We must not minimize the gravity of this defeat.

TAPPER: Could it cost Democrats the House? The congressman whose district was shaped by the Voting Rights Act, a district that now could be erased, Democrat Jim Clyburn, joins me ahead.

And seeing double, President Trump flexes his grip over more critics in his party. But as Republicans start to look ahead, what do they want next? Our political panel breaks it all down.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Hello. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington, where the state of our union is calling our mom.

This morning, 17 Americans are beginning a trip back to the U.S. after a long ordeal aboard a cruise ship struck by the hantavirus, which killed three people, sickened a handful more, and raised global fears of another pandemic. We're told no one on the ship right now is suffering any symptoms of the deadly virus.

And the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, says that hantavirus cannot be passed by a person who does not have symptoms. Still, the 17 Americans are headed to a quarantine facility in Nebraska to be checked out and then monitored at home by the CDC, which is also keeping tabs on the seven other Americans who landed in the U.S. two weeks ago.

The CDC says about 38 percent of people who develop respiratory symptoms from the hantavirus, 38 percent may die. But because it does not spread easily from person-to-person contact, the CDC and the World Health Organization are reassuring the public that this will not become another global pandemic.

Several health authorities, however, have been critical of the CDC response, calling it inadequate, expressing concern about what this might mean if there were to be another, more serious pandemic during this Trump administration.

Joining us now to discuss is the acting CDC director, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. He's also the director of the National Institutes of Health.

Dr. Bhattacharya, thank you so much for joining us.

So, the State Department and the CDC are flying the 17 remaining Americans who are on that virus-stricken cruise ship to a quarantine facility in Nebraska today. What is the latest?

DR. JAY BHATTACHARYA, NIH DIRECTOR AND ACTING CDC DIRECTOR: So the latest is that we are on the ground. The boat has landed, I think, at the Canary Islands. And the CDC has been in contact with the -- each of the passengers. We are doing interviews with them.

And we're preparing to have them evacuated to the Nebraska facility at the University of Nebraska, which is a fantastic facility, which -- specifically for this purpose. And we're doing these evaluations at the minute.

We have been coordinating with all of the states. We have been coordinating with -- basically for the last couple of weeks, a week- and-a-half, we have been coordinating with our international partners, including the WHO, again, for at least a week-and-a-half or so or longer.

So it's been pretty smooth on my -- it's been interesting to watch the professionalism of the CDC team. They have been -- I mean, I have been quite impressed.

TAPPER: So, once they arrive in Nebraska, these individuals, what will the process look like? You're not going to quarantine them? You're going to just check them out and then let them go home?

BHATTACHARYA: Well, no, we're going to interview them and assess them for risk, risk meaning -- in this case, risk doesn't mean the risk of dying from the disease or anything.

The risk is a high risk if they have been in close contact with somebody who was symptomatic. If they weren't in close contact with someone who was symptomatic, then we're going to deem them a low risk. If they were in close contact, we're going to deem them a medium or high risk.

At that point, we will offer them alternatives. Like, so, there are already, as you know, Jake, seven Americans that already flew back home I think two or three weeks ago, and are in various states, including California, in Texas, Virginia, and Georgia.

And so the protocols that are being followed for them are the same protocols that were followed in a 2018 outbreak of this exact strain of the hantavirus, including a reported case in Delaware with their 51 contacts, were following that protocol that was successful in 2018, where it led to successful control of this.

[09:05:18]

It will include advice given to these patients -- or they're not patients -- these travelers -- About -- including an offer to stay in Nebraska if they'd like, or if they want to go back home, and their home situation allows it, to safely drive them home without exposing other people on the way, and then be put in the control -- put under the auspices of their state and local public health agencies, with the CDC support all the way.

TAPPER: So you mentioned that seven Americans had already disembarked from the cruise ship after the first passenger died, I believe on April 10 -- or April 11, rather. Those seven have already returned to the U.S.

You noted that they're in five states, Arizona, California, Georgia, Texas, Virginia. Now, I'm told that it can take up to six weeks for somebody who was exposed to hantavirus to begin to show symptoms. So that is about four weeks ago.

So they're not technically out of the woods yet. There's still two weeks left. When did you begin monitoring these seven? Do any of them have any symptoms?

BHATTACHARYA: Well, I think it's -- we first learned about it at the CDC roughly the time they started to come home, I think three weeks ago, I'd have to look at the exact dates up, Jake, but it's -- but I have been tracking the situation, and the CDC teams have been tracking the situation for a while now.

As I said, we're in close contact with the state and local public health agencies for protocols for managing these patients, including contact tracing, regular check-ins, symptoms checks and, if there's any symptoms that develop, protocols for getting them to care rapidly and testing them.

So it's been basically the whole time, I think. It's been interesting to -- again, it's interesting to watch. A lot of the thinking around this is colored, I think, by the COVID experience in the press, but the protocols that we have followed are more in line with the normal hantavirus protocols that, again, were followed in 2018 in the United States.

TAPPER: Well, unlike all the precautions we're seeing this morning, a few weeks ago, when these seven people flew home, they flew home with lots of other passengers.

Has there been an effort to do contact tracing and let those other passengers know who interacted with those seven?

BHATTACHARYA: So, those passengers -- the passengers on the ship that flew home were not symptomatic when they flew home. So the -- because the virus doesn't spread unless somebody has active symptoms, those passengers on the planes are considered contacts of contacts.

So, again, there's not a reason to do that kind of sort of recursive contact tracing. The idea is that you assess the risk of the person who has been exposed. If they don't have symptoms, they're not at risk of exposing others. But you do want to make sure that you check them regularly, so that they don't have -- if they develop symptoms or if there's other considerations, give them advice especially to -- if they are -- to reduce their contacts with others when it's appropriate to do so.

TAPPER: The CDC did not issue an official alert to health care workers and health departments about the hantavirus until two days ago, on Friday. That's nearly two weeks after the first case of hantavirus linked to the cruise ship was confirmed.

Why did it take so long?

BHATTACHARYA: Well, we were still getting -- gaining information specifically about the 17.

As I said, the state and local departments that were managing the seven were in contact with the CDC and were -- we have deemed posed no risk to the public. And so it was -- the idea is that we are going to give this health alert when it's appropriate to do so.

We deemed it was appropriate when the 17 are coming, especially now, as there's going to be so much attention on the 17 as they're moving potentially back to their home states or staying in Nebraska, depending on the assessment.

TAPPER: I want to ask you about concerns we have heard from a lot of public health officials about the CDC's response or, as they say it, lack thereof.

They say that the CDC should have deployed a team to help investigate the outbreak. They say the CDC should have deployed a team to collect samples, to help with contact tracing. They say the CDC should have been communicating sooner through press briefings and press guidance and news briefings, and that its Health Alert Network should have been more active and been more clear about how the CDC's involved, especially since we're no longer part of the World Health Organization.

They say that this virus -- had this been a virus that spreads more easily than the hantavirus, we would be in real trouble right now. How do you respond to all these critics?

BHATTACHARYA: Well I think it's -- they didn't see what the CDC has been doing -- CDC has been doing, right?

[09:10:00]

So we are in touch with the WHO. We're in touch with the international organizations -- international health organizations, including the one in Spain. And we have been providing technical assistance to all of those organizations all the way through.

This is not COVID, Jake. And we don't want to treat it like COVID. We don't want to cause a public panic over this. We want to treat it with the hantavirus protocols that we -- that, again, were successful in containing outbreaks in the past.

And so we followed those protocols. Like, we gave Health -- this health alert is coming up because, again, there's this discrete event of the 17 arriving in the United States very, very soon. And so we just want to make sure that the medical community understands this.

We've been communicating the last week, as sort of the press attention has picked up more with the public as is appropriate, given the nature of this disease. The key message I want to send to your audience is that this is not COVID. This is not going to have -- lead to the kind of outbreak.

And I'm pleased by -- to hear your -- the opening segment, where you emphasized that, because we shouldn't be panicking when the evidence doesn't warrant it.

TAPPER: Absolutely.

And we have been covering it that way the whole time. There's no evidence that this is anything close to the COVID pandemic, and it's very difficult to get the hantavirus. Person-to-person contact is very difficult to happen.

But there are concerns. And what I'm hearing from health officials, public health officials, is less about what is going on with hantavirus and more about what this might -- how this might bode for a more serious outbreak.

And, on Thursday, President Trump said that the outbreak is -- quote -- "very much, we hope, under control."

But here are some of the issues; 2,400 people have been laid off from the CDC last year. The CDC does not have a confirmed director. You're an acting director. There's no surgeon general. There's no top vaccine regulator at the FDA.

Certainly, you can understand why the American people might find that worse.

BHATTACHARYA: Well, all I can tell you is I have been at the CDC now for about 2.5 months.

I have been so impressed, Jake, by the professionalism of the people that are there. And especially the disease outbreak people are true professionals. And so,to the American people, I say that the CDC has absolutely been working night and day to stay on top of this, to keep you safe from outbreaks like this.

You want to moderate the response to the actual epidemiological threat. And so that's what we did with this hantavirus threat. As you said, Jake, if the threat level were higher, then we would have obviously reacted differently.

There's no, in my view, in my professional judgment as acting CDC director, there's been an absolutely professional response to this by the CDC. There's, as you know, Jake, a -- the president has nominated a new CDC director. Hopefully, the Senate will vote in the coming months.

And that -- hopefully, I will make sure to make that transition as smooth as I can possibly make it. I have been going regularly down to the CDC. It's hard to wear two hats, the NIH hat...

TAPPER: Yes.

BHATTACHARYA: ... as director and also the CDC hat.

But I have been going -- basically, I haven't gotten a lot of sleep the last 2.5 months to, like, stay on top of this. These are enormously important organizations for the health of the country. And I can assure you that the CDC has been absolutely on top of this outbreak.

TAPPER: Before you go, sir, a senior administration -- tells CNN that President Trump has signed off on a plan to oust the current commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Marty Makary.

We're told this stems, at least in part, from Makary's handling of this effort to further limit access to the abortion pill. Does Makary Makary still have the confidence of President Trump?

BHATTACHARYA: I don't know, sir. I mean, you will have to ask the president.

I mean, I have seen those rumors as well. Marty Makary is an absolutely amazing scholar, an absolutely amazing surgeon, an absolutely amazing FDA commissioner and a good friend of mine. I have not heard anything firsthand on the rumors I can talk about.

TAPPER: All right.

Thank you so much, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. I really appreciate your time today.

Did Democrats just lose the redistricting war, the gerrymandering war? He was elected in the wake of the Voting Rights Act and he rose to become a Democratic House leader. Now Republicans are trying to redraw him right out of office.

South Carolina Democratic Congressman Jim Clyburn joins me next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:18:42]

TAPPER: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

Republicans are winning the mid-decade gerrymandering wars. And they just got some help from the judicial branch. The Virginia Supreme Court declared null and void the new 10-to-1 Democrat to Republican congressional map in that commonwealth at the same time that the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, allowing red Southern states to rush to redraw their maps before November, getting rid of districts that had been previously drawn to bolster minority representation in Congress.

That could theoretically end the career of one of the nation's most powerful Democrats, Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, as Republicans all the way up to the president are looking to draw him out of office.

Joining us now to discuss, South Carolina Congressman Jim Clyburn.

Congressman Clyburn, is your congressional seat headed for elimination? What would that mean for South Carolina voters, for Congress and for you?

CLYBURN: Well, thank you very much for having me, Jake.

The voters will have the last word on this. And I don't know why people think I cannot get reelected if they redistrict South Carolina. Now, I have a district that's about a 45 percent African-American. I have no idea what the number will be after the legislature finishes.

[09:20:04]

But whatever that number is, I will be running on a record and a promise, my record and America's promise. So I'm going to run irrespective of what the makeup of the district might be, because I believe that I have a record that is very acceptable to the South Carolina voter and I have a good understanding of America's promise. And we'll run on that.

TAPPER: So it is possible, of course, that they will make it a more Republican district, a more leaning Republican district. You've obviously been a Democratic leader and one of the more vocal leaders of the Democratic Party for decades.

What would your pitch to Republican voters be?

CLYBURN: The same as it is to Democratic voters, as I said, my record and America's promise.

I plan to run on that and I plan to win on that. But I think that it is very clear to most people in America that voters, most voters believe in fundamental fairness. Most voters believe in competence. And most voters can tell the difference between a true public servant and someone who may be in it for the next social hit. TAPPER: So let's talk about the redistricting wars, the

gerrymandering wars more broadly. President Trump kicked off this battle by urging Texas to redistrict and create more Republican- leaning seats last year.

Then Democrats decided to fight fire with fire. California came after that, Virginia and more. After redrawing maps in six states, Republicans now have approximately an eight-seat advantage in these gerrymandering wars.

What do you think this might mean come November? Might Republicans hold the House?

CLYBURN: Well, they might and they might not, because I do believe that the voters in this country are watching very closely, and they are feeling emotionally what the threat is to our future.

And I do not believe that the majority of the voters in this country condone and will agree with what President Trump is doing. South Carolina, our delegation, our House, talked with him -- the Senate, I guess, on day before yesterday.

But the Supreme Court two years ago spoke to this district and said it was not unconstitutional. But the president says he wants them to redraw the lines anyway. All I'm going to say to that is, be very careful what you pray for, because what I do believe is that, when they finish with the redistricting, there will be the possibilities of at least Democrats getting elected here in South Carolina to the United States Congress.

TAPPER: So you think that the redistricting they're doing in South Carolina could not only dilute your Democratic-leaning district, but other Republican-leaning districts, so as to make them more competitive. That's interesting.

I want to ask you about some of the criticisms of these redistricting efforts that we've heard from some of the other Democratic leaders. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, he called the Supreme Court's decision to weaken the Voting Rights Act, as it were -- quote -- "another step towards resurrecting the Jim Crow South."

Georgia Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock said it was a -- quote -- "21st century version of Jim Crow in new clothes."

Do you agree?

CLYBURN: Absolutely, I agree, so much so that I have been saying this now for the last four or five years, and people have been looking at me as if I'm crazy or something.

I just published a book. I think we have talked about it here.

TAPPER: Yes.

CLYBURN: "The First Eight." That is about the eight African-Americans that served in Congress from South Carolina before me. I'm the ninth. And the fact of the matter is, they all were kicked out of office over

this kind of tortured gerrymandering, as well as the kind of creative devices that you see put in forth in the so-called SAVE Act, something else that the president wants.

He's been trying to force the Senate to pass the SAVE Act. I will ask anybody, take a look at the SAVE Act and then take a look at my book, "The First Eight," because that book will tell you exactly what they did after the Civil War, after bringing Reconstruction to an end, and initiated Jim Crow.

[09:25:05]

There are 95 years between number eight in my book and yours truly, number nine. That did not happen organically. That happened because Congress and the Supreme Court changed the rules, as they are doing today.

TAPPER: And, on that note, the reason why this scramble to redistrict in the South in places like Louisiana, Alabama, Tennessee, obviously South Carolina, the reason it's happening is because the U.S. Supreme Court struck down this key provision in the Voting Rights Act.

And in his decision, Justice Alito wrote that -- quote -- "Vast social change has shown that some race-based voting protections are no longer necessary." What was your reaction when you first read that?

CLYBURN: Well, my first reaction was, if you look at -- let's just look at South Carolina and look at the congressional districts in South Carolina, why is it OK to have a 75 percent white district and that's not racial; if you have a 45 percent black district, that is racial?

So what is this about? There's no way that the numbers bear this out. When you look at what the Supreme Court's reasons have been, you have to come to the conclusion that they are throwing everything out of the window, coming up with new theories, putting in their own prejudices in this, and they are being very partisan in their rulings.

I never thought I would see today that the United States Supreme Court would be so openly partisan with what it's been doing. And I really believe, if you look at all of these decisions and you look at the history of the country, I think that Justice Roberts is going to take his place alongside some other infamous justices like Taney, who gave us the Dred Scott decision.

TAPPER: All right, Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, Democrat, thank you for coming on, as always, sir.

We appreciate your time.

CLYBURN: Thank you very much for having me.

TAPPER: Coming up next: Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Cortez, Democrat of New York, sparking some buzz when she was asked if she wants to run for president. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): My ambition is way bigger than that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:31:55]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): Today, justice was not served. We have to recognize that they will use every tool, legal or illegal, to try to stop Americans from saying this is not the direction we want to go. If there's ever a time for us to double down and speak up and stand up louder and more forcefully, it's now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia on the Virginia Supreme Court's decision to strike down the redistricting plan voters had just passed. It would have given Democrats four new House seats, taking it from a six-to-five Democrat to Republican House representation tool, 10 to one. Now it's back to six to 5.

Kate Bedingfield, it does look like Republicans are definitely winning these redistricting or gerrymandering wars, maybe anywhere from one to 11 seats, depending on, A, how everything susses out, and then also, B, whether or not things actually go as projected.

For example, in Texas, the idea was Latino voters are going to go Republican. We don't know that that's actually going to happen.

KATE BEDINGFIELD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Right.

Well, I think we're looking -- based on where things stand right now, we're looking at potentially R-plus five netting out from all of this, so significant at a time when the House is decided by two or three seats.

But I do think it's important to recognize that we are in a political environment that is very challenging for Republicans. There are 13 House Republicans who won their districts by fewer than five points. Democrats have won special elections since 2024 at a plus-13 rate.

So, if you're looking -- if you're somebody who won your district by five points and you're looking at the environment, it's not a great one for you if you're a Republican. So I think the other kind of piece of this, while I would not dispute that the court decision in Virginia was not a good one for Democrats, I do think across the board this issue broadly, this redistricting issue, has been driven by Trump.

It's been tagged to Trump. It is not popular. And it contributes, in an environment where Republicans -- where people are not eager to vote for Republicans because they're frustrated with the president for any number of reasons, this is another kind of albatross political issue around his neck.

And I think Democrats can drive that as they're working to turn their voters out.

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Kate, I hate to ruin your morning, but it's going to be more like R-plus 10.

BEDINGFIELD: I assure you, you will not ruin my morning, Scott Jennings.

JENNINGS: It's going to be more like 10 or 11, I think, after all of this, because not only do you have the Virginia case. You have got Louisiana redrawing, Tennessee.

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: Let's put up the map, if we can there, just to show the redistricting push. We calculate that Republicans have figured out a way to pick up about 14 seats, Democrats about six. So that's in net eight.

JENNINGS: But you haven't -- but Louisiana is still yellow. That's going to be another.

TAPPER: Yes. Yes. It's all in flux.

JENNINGS: Alabama is another one. South Carolina mayor -- we will see what happens in South Carolina.

So the point is, this is -- and, look, don't take it for me, "Washington Post," "New York Times," the math and the map totally upended. So, just a few days ago, Republicans were in the doldrums about the midterms. Now, because of Virginia, because of the redraws after the Voting Rights Act case, you have got Republicans feeling resurgent.

The map looks good. The money looks good. The candidates look good. So we actually have a real race here, where just a couple of weeks ago Republicans were in despair.

BEDINGFIELD: But Republicans still have to win those seats.

[09:35:01]

ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I mean, the political map, like, you all are cheating. OK, just accept it.

JENNINGS: How is it cheating?

(CROSSTALK)

ALLISON: Let me just finish. Let me finish.

You're cheating, and because you -- politically, are not favorable right now. And so this is the only way you would actually win the House is by drawing maps.

But let's say you were politically favored. The reality is, these maps, from the origin story of when Texas was being redrawn and hurting one group of voters, and that is black voters, black voters were losing power in Texas.

The Voting Rights Act was gutted. In less than a week, you all took power away from black people in Tennessee and South Carolina and Louisiana. So perhaps maybe this cheating might work out in your favor.

But let me tell you, there is one group of voters that will not be silenced in this moment. There is one group of voters that always have realized what that make America great was. And you have really erupted the sleeping giant that has passively been looking and seeing what this administration is doing, not even, like what I say Trump administration always does a Whac-A-Mole.

They have surgically attacked black voters since day one, from cutting DEI and now to the Voting Rights Act. And I want to see what they do in November.

BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, let's rewind the tape.

In 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which is partisan and elected at the ballot box and majority Democrat, redrew Pennsylvania's map to help Democrats take over Congress in 2018. Democrats were not outraged by that.

Mark Warner, who just decried this Virginia decision, the decision was written by Justice Arthur Kelsey. You know who put him on the appellate bench? Governor Mark Warner. This is selective outrage from Democrats.

North Carolina has redrawn their lines about six times in the last six elections. Why? Because Democrats always go to court and always try to get new lines that are favorable to them. Sue 'til blue. That's the mantra that they use.

TAPPER: Sue 'til blue?

TODD: Sue 'til blue. Democrats will sue on any map until it's blue. They do their mid-decade redistricting in the courts. And we have seen it for many years.

And that is what's happening here. They've gone to Utah this cycle and sued to get the map drawn for themselves. Like, partisan redistricting is a fact of life. And now...

ALLISON: This isn't partisan.

JENNINGS: What is it?

ALLISON: Racial redistricting.

TODD: On the campaign... (CROSSTALK)

ALLISON: You literally are taking Memphis, which is a city that -- with black voters, and you split it in three, stretching 3,000 miles.

JENNINGS: Who's the current Democrat congressman there? What -- is it a black congressman?

ALLISON: Just because -- black people are allowed to elect people that don't look like them?

JENNINGS: Exactly.

And that is the point I wanted you to make, because just because you're not going to have a black congressman, why is it that a Republican can't do just as well representing black voters as a Democrat?

(CROSSTALK)

ALLISON: Because they aren't electing...

JENNINGS: Why does your race determine your politics?

ALLISON: It doesn't. It doesn't. No. Just be -- you're making my point, actually. The assumption is black people...

JENNINGS: I think you're making my point.

ALLISON: No, no, no.

The assumption is black people will only elect black people. No, black people are smart enough to elect...

(CROSSTALK)

ALLISON: No, let me finish.

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: Just let Ashley finish.

ALLISON: Black people will elect people who will actually represent them, who have their best interests at heart.

And what Republicans have done in Tennessee is dismantle the power for black people to have their voice. They did the same thing in Texas, because they said they thought Latinos were going to swing for Republicans.

There are black people that are represented. I'm black and I got a Republican president right now. Black people don't elect black people based on race. They elect people that are aligned with their morals, their belief in justice, and Republicans just took that away from them in Tennessee and in other states.

JENNINGS: I just disagree that the only person, the only kind of a politician who can elect black people in Congress must be a Democrat.

This is just an artificial...

ALLISON: That's not what I'm saying. That's not what I'm saying.

(CROSSTALK)

JENNINGS: ... for the Democratic Party.

Black voters are still fully franchised and go vote for whoever they want.

ALLISON: That's not what I'm saying.

JENNINGS: It just doesn't have to be a Democrat.

TAPPER: Kate.

BEDINGFIELD: Well, I think, Brad, to your sue 'til blue, were Republicans not just celebrating a Supreme Court decision that gutted the Voting Rights Act on racial grounds, but also embraced partisan gerrymandering?

That was part of the actual reasoning given behind the decision, was that districts should be drawn from a partisan perspective.

(CROSSTALK)

TODD: Partisan district has always been allowed by the Supreme Court. It's always been a criteria allowed. We delegate this responsibility to the states.

Now, by the way, it wasn't always the case. We used to elect some members of Congress statewide. You could go back to that if you wanted to do that right now; 1967 is the Single-Member District Act that you could repeal.

But we have always allowed courts, majority liberal courts, majority conservative courts have always allowed partisanship as a criteria.

TAPPER: All right, everyone stick around.

We have got more to talk about. Who does President Trump think should inherit the MAGA movement and what's up with AOC running for president? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:44:16]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OCASIO-CORTEZ: They assume that my ambition is a title or a seat. And my ambition is way bigger than that. My ambition is to change this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at the University of Chicago's Institute of Politics when asked about possible races in her future, whether Senate from New York, president. Oh, no, her ambition is bigger than that.

Is AOC a potential 2028 Democratic nominee, do you think?

ALLISON: I think Big Bird is a potential 2028 at this point.

(LAUGHTER)

ALLISON: No. Yes.

TAPPER: No, but seriously, she's...

ALLISON: No, I do think she is. And I actually appreciated that answer where 2028 can be included in that. But she went on to say she actually is thinking bigger in terms of ambitious policies.

[09:45:06]

TAPPER: Oh, yes, like single-payer health care, yes.

ALLISON: To improve the lives of Americans.

So, yes, of course, if you had a list of 10 candidates for 2028 on the Democratic side, which I actually think the primary will include, AOC should be on that list. Now, whether or not she's going to be able to win or not, I'm not breaking any news here.

TAPPER: Yes, yes.

ALLISON: She's a smart politician and people like her. And people like some of her policies as well.

TAPPER: What do you think?

TODD: I think she's the spirit animal for today's Democratic Party. And I don't underestimate her a bit.

I think she is very effective politically, but I also think she's very radical. And the key for Republicans right now is to look like we have more of a plan and we are less radical than the Democrats. It comes down to that with the American middle right now. They want order and they want to be against extremism.

AOC's an extremist. I think they should nominate her.

ALLISON: The only problem is that you all are in office right now and I don't think people feel order.

(LAUGHTER)

TAPPER: What do you say? BEDINGFIELD: Well, I absolutely think she should be a candidate in

2028. She has enormous energy. She has built an enthusiasm behind her. Democrats need that kind of energy.

But I think the thing that she did effectively in this answer that's a really good contrast with Trump and the Trump administration is, she took her answer to the country. Now, you can argue about whether you think single-payer is viable. That's a policy fight.

But she took her answer to this question that was about her and made it about the country. And part of what people are so frustrated -- including people who voted for Donald Trump in 2024, are so frustrated by with the Trump administration is a focus on his personal grievances, enriching his family, building his ballroom.

And so I thought that was -- it was very effective. I don't know whether she intended it that way, but it was very effective that she did it. And of course she should be in the running in 2028.

JENNINGS: Yes, I assume she's running.

I mean, I take everybody seriously, except Newsom, who I do not take seriously.

TAPPER: Well, we'll talk -- put a pin in that. Go ahead.

JENNINGS: But I take her seriously because of what Brad said. She is the energy. That's where -- on the left, what she does and what she says, as silly and stupid as it may be, that's where all the energy on the left is right now.

You look at the primaries that are going on at this moment. They got this Platner character in Maine. They've got lunatics running in Michigan. All the energy in these Democratic primaries are flowing towards people. And they'll forgive anything, even a Nazi tattoo, as long as you've got the right radical energy.

ALLISON: You literally have people, though, who are saying that they want the entire 14th Amendment overturned in your party. So let's be careful how...

TAPPER: That's an Alabama speaker of the House reference.

ALLISON: Like, let's...

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: So let's turn to the Republican side, because Vice President Vance made his first trip to Iowa as vice president.

At the same time, Secretary of State Marco Rubio posted a video of an answer he gave to a question when he was giving a briefing at the White House set to dramatic footage and music. It is meant as a celebration of the America's 250th anniversary. But it reads like something else. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: My hope for America is what it's always been. I think it's the hope I hope we all share. We want it to continue to be the place where anyone from anywhere can achieve anything, where you're not limited by the circumstances of your birth, by the color of your skin, by your ethnicity, but, frankly, it's a place where you are able to overcome challenges and achieve your full potential.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I mean, that could be -- that would not be out of place on a New Hampshire or Iowa TV station.

TODD: Secretary Rubio's briefing this week generated more buzz among the Republicans, I know, than anything that's happened in the last year. He has the potential to keep the Republican base intact that President Trump got and bring back some of Trump's critics.

We will see if Secretary -- if Vice President Vance has the same potential. I think Rubio demonstrated that this week it's a long time, but I thought this was a pretty important moment.

TAPPER: What do you think?

JENNINGS: Yes, look, Rubio -- you talk to people, hardcore MAGA voters, I think more than anybody else in the administration, Rubio has outkicked his coverage based on the expectations for him, A, with that crowd.

And, B, for the old-world normie Republicans who've always loved Rubio, they're like, this guy is terrific. So I agree with Brad on the buzz. My assumption is -- and Rubio has said this -- Vance and Rubio will not run against each other. And so, however this shakes out, and I still think it would be enormously difficult to take the nomination away from the sitting vice president if he wants to get it.

(CROSSTALK)

ALLISON: I don't know. Ambition is a funny thing, and if you see there's cracks in the fissure, you go for it, because then you got to wait four years to go for it again. That...

TAPPER: Or eight.

ALLISON: Or eight, right.

That commercial should raise alarms in the Democratic Party. Here's the thing. There's a long way between now and exploratory committees and then the actual November vote. But what I will say is that what Democrats will need to do is to anchor Donald Trump to J.D. Vance or Marco Rubio.

And if things continue in this trajectory, that anchor might be too heavy. BEDINGFIELD: I think it's going to be very hard for somebody who is a

face of the Trump administration to be successful in a general election in 2028. May get the Republican nomination.

[09:50:02]

ALLISON: Yes.

BEDINGFIELD: It's going to be very, very hard for them to be successful in a general election in 2028.

TAPPER: OK, well, thank you so much. And happy Mother's Day to you, the mom we have here.

BEDINGFIELD: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

TAPPER: And thank you everybody for being here.

Today's a very important day for millions of people. More on that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: We want to wish all of you a very happy Mother's Day, especially to my mom. See you in a few minutes at brunch.

[09:55:01]

To my wife, an amazing mom to our two kids, plus my co-anchor, Dana Bash, another wonderful mom.

And to the moms who work on this show and worked on it this morning, Rachel (ph) and Cassie (ph) and Courtney (ph) and McKayla (ph), who's at home with her newborn, all of you have a very happy Mother's Day. Have -- I hope you all feel appreciated and loved.

And if today is a difficult day for you, you're missing your mom, you didn't have a mom, we're thinking of you too.

Thanks for spending your Sunday morning with us.

"FAREED ZAKARIA GPS" starts next.