Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

CNN International: Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship; Justices Lift Caps on Campaign Spending by Parties; Justices Side with Republican States on Trans Sports Bans; Sources: Oman Delivers Proposal on Hormuz Strait; Ukraine Launches Major Drone Attack on Moscow; Death Toll from Earthquakes in Venezuela Rises to at Least 1,943; Russia's Energy Crisis. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired June 30, 2026 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, "THE BRIEF": Hello, and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and

you're watching "The Brief."

Just ahead this hour, the U.S. Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship in a rebuke to President Donald Trump. It was one of a flurry of new

decisions on the final day of the court's term. Sources say Oman has delivered a proposal on the future of the includes plans to charge a so-

called service fee and lifting the spirits of Ukrainian youngsters with the power of sports. We're going to hear from former New York Governor George

Pataki on his campaign to help Ukraine. That story and plenty more coming up.

We begin with major rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court, beginning with a long-anticipated decision on birthright citizenship. The high court upheld

the 14th Amendment, which says that anyone born on U.S. soil is automatically a U.S. citizen, virtually anyone.

It is a major loss for President Trump. His executive order tried to restrict children of undocumented immigrants or temporary residents from

obtaining birthright citizenship. We're going to hear from the lead counsel in that case in just a moment. CNN spoke to one expectant mother who

considered giving her child up for adoption if the ruling had gone the other way.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EMMA CONFESOR, EXPECTANT MOTHER (through translator): Of course, because it didn't seem fair to me. It didn't seem fair that the baby wouldn't have

citizenship. I had considered adoption so the baby could have a better future.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: In other key decisions, the Supreme Court allowed states to ban transgender children from playing on girls' sports teams. That comes amid a

conservative backlash against trans rights. Lastly, the court lifted a decades-long cap on how much money political parties can spend on

candidates. All three decisions were 6-3 on the final day of the court's term.

Joining me now, Harold Koh. He's a Yale University law professor and former legal advisor for the U.S. State Department. Professor, great to have you

back.

HAROLD KOH, LAW PROFESSOR, YALE UNIVERSITY AND FORMER LEGAL ADVISER, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT: Good to see you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: All right. So, beginning with the birthright decision, prior to this court, justices over decades saw no leeway in the language of the 14th

Amendment and in subsequent precedent. So, what holes did this conservative minority in this case find?

KOH: Well, the problem is that this case was decided 6-3 on the result, 5- 4 on the constitutional issue, but it was much closer than it needed to be. It should have been decided 9-0. You know, this has been playing on the

language of the 14th Amendment, and it's been the law for 128 years in a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that hasn't been challenged.

But more fundamentally, Jim, for the Declaration of Independence's 250th anniversary, it basically states the proposition that all men are created

equal. They are born equal. There is one rule of citizenship in this country, which is, are you born in the USA? If you are, you are an equal

citizen, and you're not subject to some sort of caste system. And that was the thrust of an excellent concurring opinion by Justice Ketanji Brown-

Jackson in the huge range of opinions that was issued today.

SCIUTTO: Can you explain why the top line was a 6-3 decision against the president's executive order? Can you explain why you describe it as 5-4 on

the constitutional issue?

KOH: Yes. So, -- and, you know, as you know, the horrible Dred Scott decision said that black African-Americans who had been slaves could not be

citizens, even if they were born in the United States. And the 14th Amendment undertook to overrule that and to make it clear that citizenship

in this country turns on one thing, where you are born, born in the USA.

If you're born in the USA, we don't ask who were your parents and what did they believe? In other words, if you're born here, you get a fresh start to

be an American and to live the American dream.

[18:05:00]

Now, what the justices claim, some of the justices claim today, Clarence Thomas in particular, was that this was designed to help black African-

American slaves become citizens, but it didn't do anything for yellow and brown immigrants. But that had been rejected by the Supreme Court in 1898.

And then Congress had reaffirmed this in two statutes that were passed, adopting that exact view in 1940 and 1952.

Justice Kavanaugh said, well, the statute is clear. So, I will vote for the result that the executive order is illegal. But then on the constitutional

issue, he made what I think is plainly an incorrect statement, which is that Congress could change this rule. But five justices said the executive

order is unconstitutional. So, a statute trying to do the same thing would be unconstitutional as well.

The statute that exists and is on the books is constitutionally required. And so, Congress, if it passed a law, it would be struck down.

SCIUTTO: Does this decision close the door to future attempts to end birthright citizenship or did those dissents in some way kind of mark a

path?

KOH: Well, they mark an extreme path for people who want to revisit this divisive issue pointlessly. There was never any explanation of how a rule

based on your parents is going to work. The rule that was being proposed by the government, which was followed by Justice Thomas, is if you're an

undocumented alien, you give birth to someone on U.S. soil, they're not a citizen if they don't bear their domicile is not in the United States. But

Justice Gorsuch essentially disagreed with that view, although strangely adopting and joining Thomas's opinion.

I think going forward, I would put aside those opinions. They show just how extreme those members of the court are. The main language is in Chief

Justice Robert's majority. He says that the right of citizenship is a right to have rights, to freely participate in the political community. The 14th

Amendment extended a promise to all citizens to be equal citizens upon their birth. And he said, we keep that promise today. And I think that for

July 4th, that is a message.

This is a country that is e pluribus unum, from many one, the low born and have a fresh start and a chance to make it as an American. And in that

sense, you are joined with every other American who shares that advantage of being born in the USA. And that's all you need to know.

SCIUTTO: In a nation of immigrants, all of us, I think all of our families can trace folks who came here and were able to take advantage of that right

to birthright citizenship.

On the other decisions, if I could touch on them briefly, the courts, as we noticed, the states may draw distinctions with trans transgender athletes.

Can you tell us the significance of this decision? And does it establish a broader legal precedent beyond transgender citizens?

KOH: Well, the problem is that the Supreme Court has basically said that there is a higher standard that states must pass if they're going to

discriminate against people based on sexual orientation or sexual identity. And here they did not apply a higher standard of anti-discrimination for

transgender athletes.

Let's face it, this court is hostile to LGBTQs and it's hostile to immigrants. If there's a common thread running through the opinions of the

last few weeks, it's that immigrants are viewed as somehow not part of the American polity, even though, as you said, Jim, we're a nation of

immigrants. And you may be an Italian American, I may be a Korean American, but what unites us is that we have the same set of beliefs that all persons

are created by equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We're going to be celebrating that this weekend. And that's the thing. There is one form of citizenship. All citizens are equal. And we believe in

the United States and the principle of equal citizenship, not a caste system where some race, some religion, some level of wealth, some level of

ownership makes some people better than others. Everybody has a fresh start and an equal chance in this country.

SCIUTTO: Yes. And of course, we're all immigrants. Just a question of how many generations back that goes, right? Nature of the country. Harold Koh,

we appreciate you breaking this all down.

[18:10:00]

KOH: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Well, let's dive even deeper into today's ruling on birthright citizenship. My next guest was the lead counsel in the case against

President Trump's executive order. Joining me, Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrant Rights Project. Cody, thanks so much for joining.

CODY WOFSY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ACLU IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT: Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: You heard Professor Koh explaining the constitutional issues behind this, which of course you know very well. I'm curious, what does

today's ruling mean in practice for families who were worried about losing birthright citizenship?

WOFSY: Absolutely. We heard from dozens and dozens of families over the course of this litigation about their fear, their confusion, their concerns

for their children. These are folks who, many have lived here in this country for decades, different statuses. Some people here on work visas or

long-term student visas like a PhD candidate. Others seeking safety in this country with asylum or temporary protected status, or even DACA recipients

who've been here since they themselves were children.

What they all had in common were that they had children whose citizenship was being attacked and threatened by the Trump administration. Those

families today can breathe a sigh of relief. The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution protects their children's citizenship, and that no

one, not President Trump and not Congress, can take that away from them.

So, we're very pleased that those children's right to citizenship has been vindicated. It's millions of families around the country, and it's also

generations of Americans who have fought for full and equal citizenship.

SCIUTTO: Just in terms of establishing the significance of this decision, if the ruling had gone the other way, what would we have seen? We would see

-- we have seen sort of a denaturalization, right, or the taking away of citizenship of people forcefully? How many people?

WOFSY: Right. So, the executive order itself targeted children born on or after February 20, 2025, who did not have a parent with permanent

immigration status. The estimates are we're talking about around 20,000 babies born every single month, projecting out for the next 20 years, it

would be around 5 million additional undocumented people in this country, American-born children.

But, you know, the executive order is even more pernicious than that because while the order itself was forward-looking in that way, the

constitutional ideas that the government was asking the Supreme Court to adopt and that justices in dissent were ready to adopt would cast doubt on

the citizenship of millions more people who have lived their entire lives as American citizens going back potentially generations. And I think it

would open the door to questioning the citizenship of our fellow Americans much more broadly than that. That's already a corrosive part of our

political discourse. And I think that this would have just, you know, put that into hyperdrive.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Are you concerned at all that in a few years' time, the court's makeup could change? Perhaps a Republican president or Donald Trump

gets another appointment, that this could flip at another point? I mean, you could certainly imagine folks bringing a case if they think they then

have the votes on such a court.

WOFSY: Look, the Supreme Court has now rejected these arguments twice, first in 1898, and the second time today. That said, there have always been

those in this country who have wanted to limit the citizenship of our nation to just certain people. That goes all the way back to that shameful

Dred Scott decision that Professor Koh was talking about, which held that for black Americans, even if they were born here, even if their parents

were born here, that they could never be citizens of the United States. That's exactly what was rejected in creating the Citizenship Clause of the

14th Amendment.

It enshrined this very American principle, that if you're born in this country, you belong here. There may be attacks in the future, and if there

are, we will be there to fight them every step of the way.

[18:15:00]

SCIUTTO: Cody Wofsy, we appreciate you joining us.

WOFSY: Thanks so much for having me.

SCIUTTO: Well, on now to the Mideast. CNN is learning that Oman has now proposed a change in how shipping will move through the Strait of Hormuz

going forward. Sources say that Oman is outlining a plan that would have shipping companies pay, quote, unquote, service fees to use the Strait.

They don't call them tolls, but it's not clear to us or many others what the difference is.

The proposal comes as Iranian officials are expected to meet with Qatari negotiators to discuss frozen Iranian assets and an initial deal with the

U.S., at least in more general terms. They are not expected to have direct talks with the U.S. envoys there, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.

Senior White House Correspondent Kristen Holmes joins me now with more. I mean, I wonder how the administration is saying talks are proceeding if

they're not even talking to each other directly.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's a good question and also one that we've been asking, particularly since yesterday,

when it was unclear who Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner would be meeting with.

If anyone, we had heard from the U.S. side repeatedly that they were going to have these talks in Doha, but it was not clear until this morning that

the Iranians were not part of those direct talks. Now, Iran has been saying for days that they were not participating in any kind of high-level

discussions, but yet they also said they weren't participating in any technical discussions. And now, we're learning that they are going to meet

with the Qataris as part of this kind of back-and-forth technical discussions, but no high-level talks.

Now, I do want to mention this proposal because it sounds as though there are still a lot of complications here. One, what is the difference, as you

noted, between a service fee and a toll? The White House is saying that President Trump has been clear that there will be no tolls in the Strait of

Hormuz. We're also hearing pushback from various sources saying that Oman is not pushing any kind of proposal in which people would have to pay. But

this is something that has been thrown out there into the ether, and they are expected to potentially talk about that in Doha.

Now, one of the things you mentioned was what the Iranians are going to be talking to the Qataris about. And Iran made clear that they want to talk

about some of the points on the memorandum of understanding, including those frozen assets.

There has been a lot of back and forth and, frankly, information that doesn't line up from Iran and the United States over what's going on with

those frozen assets. Iran has essentially said that that money is going to start being released, that $6 billion, half of the overall frozen assets,

which was $12 billion. The U.S. has said that's not happening right now, and has continued to say that anything that is released is going to go back

into the U.S., essentially that the Iranian government will have to use that money to buy U.S. goods, agricultural, to give back to the Iranian

people, something that they deny.

Now, during the talks today, one of the things that we are told came up between the U.S. and the Qatari diplomats, the negotiators in this case,

was this conversation around the ceasefire in Lebanon. One of the things we announced last week or reported on last week was the announcement of this

kind of trilateral agreement, which was kind of a renewal or a re-upping of the ceasefire, with Israel saying that they would withdraw from parts of

Lebanon. It is clear that this is still a huge point of contention in these ongoing negotiations.

The other part of this that's unclear to me, as I've been talking to my sources, is what exactly they mean when they give a readout of their

meeting saying that they're having conversations about where these negotiations go next.

I mean, we are really in a crunch period here. The entire time frame was 60 days, and yet it still doesn't feel as though the needle has moved at all

since Vance was there building what he called a framework or a foundation of this deal, because there are still questions, Jim, about what's in the

memorandum of understanding, which was just meant to be the first part of what was going to be a larger framework.

SCIUTTO: And, as you know, wouldn't be the first time a timeline slid in terms of these negotiations or other negotiations. Kristen Holmes at the

White House, thanks so much.

Still to come on "The Brief," how a former New York governor founded a sports initiative that helps empower children in Ukraine. My conversation

with George Pataki is just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:20:00]

SCIUTTO: The City State of Monaco is in shock. This after an apparent assassination attempt. According to the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, a

parcel bomb wounded three people in a family of Ukrainian origin there. The intended target reportedly a Ukrainian tycoon who had renounced his

Ukrainian citizenship. As our Melissa Bell explains, a manhunt for a suspect is now underway.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: A manhunt is underway here in France and in Monaco after a bomb went off on Monday night

in the city-state, not known for its violent crime and normally a haven of peace. What we understand, even as that manhunt continues, is that Vadym

Yermolaiev has been named by Ukrainian authorities as being one of the victims of this bomb blast. He's a 58-year-old Ukrainian who renounced his

Ukrainian citizenship.

Back in 2019, he explained himself for tax reasons. He's now a citizen of Cyprus and was living with his family in Monaco. Nothing for now from

authorities on why he may have been the target of this assassination attempt.

What we do know is that he was sanctioned by Kyiv back in 2023 over allegations that he'd done business in Russian-occupied Crimea, an

allegation that he denied. We also know that he has a son who was convicted of fraud in Estonia but left the country after doing a few months of jail

time there.

So, some elements emerging about this particular family, that of 58-year- old Kyiv, but very little more from authorities who are staying very tight- lipped for now about what the motive may have been.

Melissa Bell, CNN, Paris.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Well, Ukraine says that it has struck one of Russia's largest satellite communication centers for the second time in just a week.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the Dubna Communication Center near Moscow is used for intelligence gathering and coordinating Russian armed

forces. It is some 300 miles from the Ukrainian border.

The region's governor said a drone had hit an administrative building, as that official described it. It comes as Kyiv ramps up pressure on the

Kremlin with an increasing number of long-range drone attacks.

Still ahead, Venezuelan hospitals push to the breaking point as the death toll from the country's devastating earthquakes pushes yet higher.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief," I'm Jim Sciutto, and here are the international headlines we're watching today.

The U.S. Supreme Court has concluded its term with a flurry of blockbuster decisions. And perhaps the most eagerly anticipated ruling of the entire

term, the justices upheld the idea of birthright citizenship for almost anyone born on U.S. soil. They overturned Donald Trump's executive order,

which is sought to end that right. It is a big legal loss for the president.

Sources say Oman is now outlining a plan that would require shipping companies to pay service fees to use the Strait of Hormuz. Not clear to

anyone what makes that different from a toll. Qatar says technical talks between the U.S. and Iran are underway. However, there are no plans for

high-level meetings.

House Republican Tom Kean is back on Capitol Hill after a month-long absence. The New Jersey congressman missed more than 100 days in Washington

this year. He told colleagues on the House floor today that he'd been diagnosed with depression.

The Venezuelan government says the death toll from last week's devastating twin earthquakes has now topped 1,900, with more than 10,000 people

injured. Search and rescue operations are continuing as more and more citizens criticize the government's crisis response. The World Health

Organization warned Tuesday that hospitals in Venezuela are coming under significant strain.

Journalist Mary Triny Mena is in Caracas now. Mary, I wonder what kind of government-led disaster response you're seeing there. I spoke to an

opposition leader yesterday who said that the army was virtually non- existent in this. Who's helping all these people out?

MARY TRINY MENA, JOURNALIST: Well, solidarity has been put to the test here in Venezuela with many citizens. Regular citizens coming to donation

centers, shelters, bringing food, bringing aid, and of course the international community who reacted rapidly to the situation in Venezuela

right away.

[18:30:00]

Even countries that are politically opposed to Venezuela came to support the country. For example, El Salvador. And even the U.S., with a country in

which we have differences for many years, the situation shifted back in January.

But right now, the situation is getting worse as the hours go by. I'm here in Parque del Este. This is a shelter, one of the many shelters implemented

in Venezuela, there are more than 15,000 displaced people. They say they have no place to go.

I want to show you this park. It's basically the central park of Venezuela. People would come here to exercise, to share with their families, to visit

the zoo. Now, it's a tent city, a temporary refuge for hundreds of Venezuelans. And this is just one of them. The largest one is in La Guaira,

which is the place more affected by the earthquake.

And right now, what they are receiving is, of course, water and food. And they have a place to stay here. But they have no answer on how they are

going to do, because they lost everything completely, their homes completely.

SCIUTTO: Mary Triny Mena in Caracas, our hearts certainly go out to all the people still suffering there.

Well, still ahead, Russians are now souring on their country's economy, as Ukraine drone strikes trigger worsening gas shortages, long lines at the

pump. We're going to have the latest on Russia's energy crisis and what it means for the country.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, green arrows across the board on Wall Street. The Dow hitting yet one more fresh record, and

the NASDAQ rallied for a second straight session. Tuesday's close marked the end of the month, quarter, and first half of the trading year on Wall

Street. The S&P and NASDAQ posting their best quarterly gains since 2020, despite the Iran war and continued concerns over just how pricey A.I.-

related stocks have gotten.

At the same time, in Russia, the Kremlin's unprovoked war on Ukraine is having a dire impact on the Russian economy, and everyday Russians are now

feeling the blowback. A new Gallup poll shows that Russians are more pessimistic about their economy than at any point in the past 20 years. 60

percent say economic conditions are getting worse. That is a record high. And 58 percent say now's a bad time to look for work.

[18:35:00]

A study was conducted between March and May before the most recent Ukrainian strikes, which hit Russian energy sites, as well as many targets

around the capital, Moscow. Those attacks, particularly on energy infrastructure, are triggering fuel shortages across the country, and, as

you see there, long lines at gas stations.

The Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, addressed the challenges facing the economy in a rare public statement on all this just a few days ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): You are well aware that problems persist for both drivers and businesses. Queues at petrol

stations, unfortunately, also remain. It is not always possible to find the required grade of fuel at present. And, of course, we understand the

difficulties faced by agricultural producers and farming enterprises during this period.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: News reports say that Russia is now currently in talks with other nations to purchase fuel to try to ease the energy crisis. It's a stunning

move for a country which is a major global oil producer and exporter. Some now believe that the Russian economy is in danger of falling into

recession. Russian GDP fell 0.3 percent in the first quarter. That's the first negative reading in three years.

Maria Snegovaya joins me now. She is a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Maria, thanks so much for joining.

MARIA SNEGOVAYA, SENIOR FELLOW, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, folks have been predicting this for Russia's economy virtually since the start of its invasion more than four and a half years

ago. Somehow the economy has maintained itself. I know that Vladimir Putin has managed to turn it into really something of a war economy. So, why are

we seeing these economic costs finally strike some pain for average Russians?

SNEGOVAYA: Well, there's a combination of various factors. First of all, the first couple of years in this war, the Kremlin has sustained the

economic growth through this mass influx of state-driven investment into the economy. But the sugar height of that investment is largely over as of

last year, which, as we have seen, has translated into a decline in the economic growth levels.

Russian economic growth in the first quarter of this year is fluctuating around 0 to 1 percent. There's also exhaustion of the rainy funds. The

fiscal stimulus no longer delivers. And a manufacturing index also has shown that even the military-industrial complex manufacturing index serves

as a manifestation of this trend, has been stagnating. The civilian industries in Russia have been in decline since approximately mid-2024.

And on top of this already quite a gloomy background, to add insult to injury, Ukraine intensified its strikes at primarily Russian refineries. To

be fair, Ukraine has been doing it since early 2024, but recently they've had a significant increase in their capacity to strike further and more

actively at Russian refineries. And as a result, we also see a gasoline crisis basically unraveling in Russia.

SCIUTTO: The Gallup poll found that 60 percent of Russians say their economy is getting worse. I wonder, is it possible that that number

understates? Because it's, of course, difficult to state your mind freely in Russia. How much do you trust these public polling figures?

SNEGOVAYA: That's a very complicated question. Many analysts have engaged with it since the start of the war. There's no obvious distortions in the

number of responses, response rates since the start of the war. But political scientists have discovered that to the extent that Russians

understate their dissatisfaction with the regime, with the war, it's probably near 10 percent points. So, to the extent that there's some

distortion, it's not enormous.

But nonetheless, we definitely see the trends. The trends are absolutely clear. There is a decline in support for the authorities. Points approval

rating has been declining since May, at least even early since April, for 8 percent to 12 percent points, depending on the pollster. There is also a

very negative consumer sentiment, as you flagged.

There is also increased demand for peace talks. Actually, as of now, the demand for peace talks in Russia is at peak. But, of course, the real

question is whether that will create real pressure for Putin, for the Kremlin, to do something about the war, to actually stop the war.

SCIUTTO: It's interesting because Ukrainian officials for some time, including the president, have been saying that these attacks on energy

infrastructure in Russia are economic sanctions of a different kind, as they've lost faith in European, U.S. sanctions, the U.S.'s relaxed

sanctions, et cetera.

[18:40:00]

Have those attacks accomplished that? I mean, have those attacks effectively served as sanctions on Russia's energy industry?

SNEGOVAYA: Well, very much so, I will flag, that Ukraine has been increasingly successful over the course of this war to, what they describe

as, bring the war back into Russia. The regime, since the start of the war, tried to shield the average Russian, you know, the Muscovites, from the

war, making it seem as if things are normal, you know, and this is just a small, tiny military operation we are fighting elsewhere that does not

concern you.

Well, Ukrainians are showing very clearly to Russians for an extended period of time that that is not the case, and that the war concerns every

single Russian, and hence, there's got to be, you know, something that needs to be done about it. That, of course, has recently converted into

this gasoline shortages, the decline of economic growth is associated also to the worsening economic situation that also is ultimately tied to strikes

among other factors. There is also a long-term effect that is associated to Ukraine generally not giving up, and it's clear that the war is not ending,

which has created the fatigue in Russia.

So, definitely, all of that is having an impact. It does show in the polls or multiple other indicators, the consumer sentiment measured by various

studies. But, of course, whether the Kremlin will be responsive or not to this trend is a big question.

SCIUTTO: Of course, yes. Maria Snegovaya, thanks so much for laying it all out for us.

SNEGOVAYA: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, we are just days away, of course, from July 4 celebrations all over the U.S. Here in Washington, though, the drama surrounding damage

to the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool is not going away. Sunlen Serfaty learned more from the company in charge of the fix, which even had to turn

to a crisis communications firm for help.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It in the middle of the political tidal wave. This man is in charge of keeping water

in the Reflecting Pool crystal clear.

CHAS ANTINONE JR., PRESIDENT AND COO, GREENWATER SERVICES: We've never done a pool, but the water is relatively the same as the water that you

would see out in a regular lake somewhere, right? You're treating it for algae and bacteria.

SERFATY: How clean does President Trump want to get this project?

ANTINONE JR.: I don't know the answer to that question yet, but since it was really blue last week, I think he liked that.

SERFATY (voice-over): In his first TV interview, Chas Antinone, the CEO of Greenwater Services, defended its patented ozone nanobubbler, a new

technology that's costing $1.7 million and that the Trump administration is building as the state-of-the-art fix for the algae ridden pool.

ANTINONE JR.: Ozone is 3,000 times faster and 50 times more powerful than chlorine and it's able to stay in the water, travel through the water, find

the toxins that it needs. That's why we're able to treat it from both ends and treat the whole pool.

SERFATY (voice-over): But the project has been plagued with other problems too, from the new blue bottom peeling up to Trump blaming without evidence,

left wing vandals.

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: The Reflecting Pool is so beautiful they tried to destroy it.

SERFATY (voice-over): Prompting Trump to announce they'll need to drain the pool again.

TRUMP: We'll fix it right after the 4th of July.

SERFATY (voice-over): Meanwhile, the small Ohio company has been thrust into the national spotlight for their role.

SERFATY: What's your understanding of why the original bloom happened?

ANTINONE JR.: How it happened? I don't know. Some of it could have come from the pipes, could somebody have dumped some stuff in there? Anything's

possible in the middle of the night.

SERFATY (voice-over): In April, the company was given a no bid contract from the Trump administration, bypassing a competitive bidding process. The

company's co-owner is J.J. Caffaro, a longtime supporter and donor to President Trump and neighbor living near his Mar-a-Lago club.

TRUMP: J.J. Caffaro from Florida and from Cleveland. He's a man who made a lot of money in Cleveland, does a good job and a fantastic man.

SERFATY (voice-over): In 2001, Caffaro pleaded guilty to conspiracy to bribe Representative James Traficant and separately pleaded guilty in 2010

for a campaign finance violation. The Interior Department says the White House was not involved in the selection process for any contract and did

not weigh in on the company selected. Full stop.

And the company has also tried to distance itself from Caffaro, saying he is an Ohio based businessman who invested in the Ohio based company after

the owners showed him research done on local Ohio bodies of water. A spokesperson for the company said he has no involvement in the day to day

operations.

Earlier this month, Caffaro defended his company's technology, saying he believes the public scrutiny over the Reflecting Pool is from people who

don't seem to like Trump.

SERFATY: And there has been some speculation that the Trump administration potentially compounded some of the problems down here at the Reflecting

Pool. There was a 24-hour period of time where the temporary nano ozone bubblers were removed from the Reflecting Pool. That was at the request of

the National Park Service. At the same time the President was hosting a large photo op down here at the National Mall for the UFC championship.

[18:45:00]

Now, the company confirms that the permanent ozone nanobobbler technology has been installed in. It actually is off of the Reflecting Pool just over

my shoulder in a pump house off the reflecting pool.

Sunlen Serfaty, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: World Cup co-hosts, Mexico, are looking to break a decades-long streak of bad luck and make it through a knockout match. We're going to

have a preview of their upcoming match against Ecuador as well as a live report from a Mexico City fan zone.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Right now, in the Men's World Cup, France, one of the favorites to win it all, are facing Sweden and New Jersey, leading at this moment by

a score of 3-nil. French superstar Kylian Mbappe has netted two of those goals. Earlier, Norway beat the Ivory Coast 2-1 in the first knockout win

ever for Norway's men's team. And in a little more than two hours, Mexico will look to break a decades-long habit of falling down in the first round

of the knockouts when they play Ecuador.

Don Riddell is tracking today's matches and will give us the latest in just a moment. First, though, we want to go to Valeria Leon, who is in the fan

zone outside Estadio Azteca in Mexico City.

Valeria, I mean, listen, I've seen some of the shots of fans there. I know they're excited. So, I suppose the question is, how excited are they for

this match?

VALERIA LEON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, Mexico City will host its fourth of five World Cup matches today at Mexico City Stadium. And here at

the Fan Fest in Mexico City, the atmosphere has been electric. People here are celebrating the three consecutive Mexico's victories in this group

stage without conceding a single goal. And this is a feat that the national team had never achieved before.

So, now, as Mexico takes on Ecuador, here fans have packed this fan zone. Thousands of people have arrived and have gathered here to watch this

match. And of course, they are cheering on their team and hoping Mexico can make history in this World Cup, the third one that the country has

organized in its history.

And that's a good -- there's a good reason for that optimism because Mexico's best World Cup matches and best marks that they have achieved are

during these tournaments, these World Cups that Mexico has organized before. The first one in 1970 and the second one in 1986. So, here fans are

hoping that this time, and of course the home advantage, could help the team make history and of course win today. Jim.

SCIUTTO: Man, I'm going to be watching that game for sure. I'm a little jealous you're there where it's all happening.

[18:50:00]

Don Riddell, you and I are going to have to watch these matches from afar. But, man, I mean, I can't -- first of all, watching those penalty kick

finishes last night was like -- it's a form of psychological torture, you know, that those players got to go through.

And now, today, I mean, to see Haaland score, Mbappe score, I mean, I can't -- I have no idea who's going to win the Golden Boot. Tell us what you've

been watching.

DON RIDDELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: Yes. Well, I'm with you on the penalty shootouts. I mean, they are a nightmare if your team is involved in them.

And I can't imagine the players enjoy them at all. Maybe the goalkeepers do because nothing's really expected of them and they can be the heroes.

But, I mean, we saw it with Germany last night. I mean, it's been reported now that some of the players just simply refused to take a penalty in that

shootout. And that was why Jonathan Tah stepped up. Apparently, he'd never taken one before and he put it over the bar and that kind of sealed their

fate. But it is incredible theatre. It is incredible drama.

And, you know, let's talk about these first few knockout games because they've all been so close. What France are doing right now is the first

knockout game we've seen in this World Cup where there's a bit more daylight between the two teams playing. I think you mentioned France 3-nil

up against Sweden. So, cruising into the round of 16, killing Mbappe with a brace, Bradley Barcola with the other goal.

That means Mbappe, who is a previous Golden Boot winner at the World Cup, he now has six for this tournament. That ties him with Lionel Messi,

although Messi has played one game less to get to this position.

France are going to advance to play Paraguay in the next round. Of course, Paraguay caused that huge upset by knocking Germany out. This is going to

be a repeat of one of the knockout games from the World Cup tournament in 1998 when France beat Paraguay in historic fashion, Laurent Blanc scoring

the very first golden goal and Leblanc went all the way on to win that tournament. So, they might see the next one against Paraguay as a bit of an

omen for them.

Earlier today, as I think you also mentioned, Norway winning their game, seeing off Ivory Coast 2-1. This was another close game with another late

decisive goal. Erling Haaland, who didn't have much to say in this game, but to be honest, he doesn't have to, as long as he keeps finding the back

of the net. It was his goal in the 86th minute that sent Norway through. He's now got five for the tournament, one behind Messi and Mbappe.

And, yes, an historic win for Norway. And guess who they play next? Brazil, the five-time world champions. And Norway might fancy this. So, they're

incredible fans who've been pretending to row their longboats all over North America, certainly going to be rowing for a few more days and then

maybe a bit longer after that. I mean, I can't get enough of these groups. It's absolutely wonderful. But players are joining in now on the field as

well. Just great scenes with this team.

SCIUTTO: It's the best crowd celebration, I think, since the Mexican wave, right? I mean, I feel like, you know, lots of folks are going to try to

borrow it. The other thing I'll say is that one thing these early matches have shown, that no-one's really a lock, right, maybe with the exception of

France and what's going on now, and that should be something of a warning for the U.S. against Bosnia-Herzegovina tomorrow.

RIDDELL: Yes, and my team, England, are playing Democratic Republic of Congo. I mean, that on paper before this tournament might have seemed like

a bit of a give me, but I don't think so. I don't think so at all.

SNEGOVAYA: Don Riddell, I know what you're going to be doing tonight. I'll be doing the same. Thanks so much.

Well, the Men's World Cup is not just packing stadiums. It's also bringing breaking television viewership records within the U.S. despite the long-

held hesitancy to embrace soccer, at least at the top level. Brian Stelter looks at what's driving that surge in viewing.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: World cup fever is real in the United States, and the television ratings prove it. Fox and Telemundo say

they have set and broken viewership records again and again throughout the month of June, and the networks are expecting even higher ratings in the

coming days with the U.S. playing in primetime on Wednesday night.

Now, full disclosure here. Talking about World Cup ratings, there's no standard way to calculate the global audience for a tournament like the

World Cup that airs on multiple channels and multiple platforms in many different countries. But FIFA likes to call the World Cup the single most

watched sporting event on earth.

And in the U.S., it is certainly gaining in popularity. Telemundo has the Spanish language rights in the U.S. Fox has the English language rights.

And the networks combined have cued up more than 20 million viewers for some of the matches. Now, those are NFL level figures in the U.S.

Telemundo says World Cup viewership is, quote, "pacing at more than double the 2022 tournament." And Fox says at least 84 million Americans have tuned

in for at least a minute of one of the matches. So that means sampling is sky high this summer.

[18:55:00]

Now, some of those folks are just channel surfing, but others are sticking around watching match after match. I've been talking with the head of Fox's

research department and he says these numbers are already far surpassing the 2022 tournament.

And there's some obvious reasons why that is. The most obvious factor is that the games are being played in the U.S. as well as Canada and Mexico.

So, Americans are automatically more aware of the World Cup this year.

Also, the games being played in the U.S. means the time zones are favorable for American viewers. These games are often being played in the evening and

at night when more Americans are at home and able to watch.

More generally, soccer continues to grow in popularity in the U.S. and live sports continue to compel people to tune in live to watch TV live as

opposed to watching on demand or maybe never getting around to it at all.

And there's one more interesting factor here. Nielsen, the ratings company, is now measuring out of home viewing behavior in ways that it didn't or

couldn't even just a few years ago. So, now, Nielsen's capturing audience behavior at bars and restaurants and other World Cup viewing party

locations. As a result, the ratings are a fuller, more accurate picture of actual viewer viewing behavior, showing that the sport we call soccer in

the U.S. is becoming more and more popular all across America.

Brian Stelter, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAE)

SCIUTTO: Well, another reason for it. They're good and fun games to watch. Thanks so much for joining today. I'm Jim Sciuto in Washington. You've been

watching "The Brief." Please do stay with us here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END