Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump's Sweeping Tariffs; West Virginia Sues Apple Over Claims It Allows Distribution Of Child Sexual Abuse Materials; Controversial Pastor Leads Pentagon Worship Service; Trump Signs 10 Percent Global Tariffs; Trump Says Government Will Release Files On Aliens And UFOs. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired February 20, 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]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.

This hour, President Trump lashes out after the U.S. Supreme Court rules his sweeping tariffs are, in their view, illegal. But some small businesses are celebrating the decision, including my first guest, the lead plaintiff who brought the case against the White House. He's going to join us live in moments.

Plus, West Virginia is suing Apple, claiming that Apple knowingly allowed the distribution of child sexual abuse materials. The state's attorney general is going to join us live to explain his allegations and what he wants to see change.

Also, remembering Eric Dane, the Grey's Anatomy and Euphoria star who died tragically at the age of 53 after a battle with ALS. Hear the message he left behind in an interview he did under the condition it would only be released after he passed away.

And are we alone in the universe? Are aliens real? What exactly do we know about UFOs? Some of those questions could soon be answered, as President Trump directs the government to release files about alien life. The director of the documentary, the Age of the Disclosure, is here to react ahead.

The Lead tonight, President Trump disappointed and defiant after the U.S. Supreme Court handed him a rare loss on a major issue, tariffs. In a 6-3 ruling, the conservative majority court found Trump violated federal law when he unilaterally imposed sweeping tariffs across the globe. Still, the president today cited other ways to enact tariffs, saying he's immediately going to enact a 10 percent global tariff under a trade law known as Section 122.

And what happens to the whopping $130 billion in tariffs already collected? Well, the U.S. Supreme Court did not lay out how the government should handle that. And in his dissenting opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote, quote, the court says nothing today about whether and, if so, how the government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers, but that process is likely to be a mess, as was acknowledged at oral argument, unquote. So, corporations are now expected to sue to get refunds from the U.S. government, as President Trump pointed out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Wouldn't you think they would've put one sentence in there saying that keep the money or don't keep the money, right? I guess it has to get litigated for the next two years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Let's bring in CNN's Paula Reid and Kristen Holmes is at the White House. Kristen?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and you heard him there. He sounded incredibly angry. Just remember, one of the things that they were counting on some of this tariff revenue to actually pay for was to pay for at least part or a hefty part of these giant tax cuts that President Trump himself put into place in that one big, beautiful bill.

But in addition to that, these tariffs are a key part of not only his economic agenda, but also how he's been handling foreign policy. He has used them as leverage. He has gone into every single meeting touting these tariffs and trying to hang them over various countries heads. And you could tell just how personally he took this, not just by the justices who he had appointed, but in particular he was asked about two of them, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, who ruled against him in this case. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Are you surprised in particular by their decision today?

TRUMP: I am.

REPORTER: And do you regret nominating them?

TRUMP: I don't want to say whether or not I regret. I think their decision was terrible, yes.

I think it's an embarrassment to their families, if you want to know the truth, the two of them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Jake, an embarrassment to their families. Again, you can see how personally he took this. At a certain point, he said that he was ashamed of certain justices. He was clearly referring to those two. And he also praised Kavanaugh who wrote the dissent on this, saying that his stock is really rising and that he's really proud of him. He did say that he was not going to uninvite, not clear that's actually his decision to make, but he did say he wasn't going to uninvite any of these justices from the State of the Union on Tuesday. He said they were barely invited and he didn't care if they came or not.

TAPPER: Yes, I don't think it's his -- it's the speaker of the House invites the president to deliver the address. It's in the Constitution, but, okay.

Paula, based on this Supreme Court ruling, what potential legal options does Trump have now to still try to have some control over a tariff regime.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, he definitely has options, and in the middle of this press conference attacking the Supreme Court, he did lay out some of the ones that he's considering, including Section 122.

Now, here, though, this law allows the president to levy a tariff of up to 15 percent, but only for about 150 days. There's also Section 232, you'd have to find national security grounds, and it can only be used to target specific sectors, also requires an investigation, which takes time. Section 301, you'd have to investigate countries that you believe were potentially violating trade agreements or practices.

[18:05:02]

And then, interestingly, there is section 338. This is interesting because it's never actually been implemented by any president, but you'd have to find that a country was engaging in trade practices that discriminate against the U.S. The concern here, though, is using this one could violate World Trade Organization agreement.

So, as the president said in his press conference, this is going to be more complicated. And he said he took the path that he took because it was going to be more simple, but the Supreme Court is not going to allow you to just take power that was clearly delegated, they believe, to Congress for simplicity's sake.

So, the real winners today here, Jake, lawyers and accountants, this is going to be a lawyer-full employment act as all of this will be litigated.

TAPPER: All right. Kristen Holmes, Paula Reid, thanks.

Let's talk it all -- talk about it all with Victor Schwartz. He was the lead plaintiff in the case. He runs New York-based wine and spirits importer, VOS Selections.

Victor, we've had you on the show multiple times, you should get a jacket at this point, and now you just won this historic case. It has economic impact for Americans and for you. How are you feeling?

VICTOR OWEN SCHWARTZ, OWNER, VOS SELECTIONS: Pretty amazing. You know, to think of 40 years ago when I started VOS selections, that, at this point in time, I'd be in a suit standing up for the rights of all small businesses in America and winning at the Supreme Court. I mean, you know, there's no way to describe that, that feeling of elation.

TAPPER: It is kind of a moment, just to take a step -- forgetting the decision and forgetting the politics of it, the fact that a small business owner can challenge something that the most powerful person in the country, if not the world, has done, and our system of checks and balances still allows that sort of thing, and you're victorious and he's not. It is --

SCHWARTZ: Absolutely.

TAPPER: You know, I mean, it is -- you have to take a step back as an American and say, we really live in a great country.

SCHWARTZ: I've been saying that all day. I mean, and that's what this country's based on, rule of law. And that's what makes us a great economic country as well, great place to do business. And that's why it's so important to continually follow the rule of law.

TAPPER: So, the court offered no clarity on --

SCHWARTZ: That's really heard today.

TAPPER: The court offered no clarity on the practical question of what about the money the administration's already collected tens of billions through the tariffs. President Trump today said this is going to end up likely being litigated in the courts for years. I don't think he's wrong there. Do you think that you're ever going to see any tariff money refunded?

SCHWARTZ: I have two answers to that. First of all, it's not complicated, and this is just more obfuscation on the part of the administration. We pay our customs and duties on every container that comes in. Everything has a code on it, whether it's for gallonage tax or value tax, et cetera, et cetera, and it gets transferred electronically, as well as the IEEPA tariff tax. There's absolutely no reason. You can't just press a button and return that.

And there are a lot of much sharper minds than myself that say that the administration's just only trying to put up smokescreens about this. There's no question.

TAPPER: How will it impact your business if you do not get any sort of repayment?

SCHWARTZ: Well, that's the second part. Even if we don't, this is still an amazing victory for us because it allows us to move forward with clarity and stability, something we have not had either of all throughout 2025 since we were liberated in April.

TAPPER: The president also says he's looking at other ways to impose tariffs. Are you worried about that?

SCHWARTZ: Worry is not the right word. We had a big victory today. There's a reason it's not random that he used IEEPA. It was a backdoor, and as we've discovered today through the Supreme Court, a conservative Supreme Court, an illegal way to impose tariffs. Now, he will have to impose tariffs legally. Tariffs are a tax, which is assigned -- most taxes are assigned to Congress.

TAPPER: Right.

SCHWARTZ: There's been a lot of pushback, and you can see here, as your reporter mentioned, it's 150 days. It has to be a specific tax. It has to have a reason. It can't be, I don't like the color of your tie, or I don't like the way you talk to me, or some other just random, ridiculous kinds of things that he's been proposing out there for reasons for, you know, putting on tariffs. It has to be economic. And that's what this is all about. We focus on the economics and on the legality. We are in a fine place.

TAPPER: What has been the impact of these tariffs on VOS importers? You import wine and spirits from all over the world, obviously. You've been hit. Have you had to lay off employees? Have you had to raise prices? Like what's been the impact?

SCHWARTZ: We didn't lay off employees. That would really be the nuclear option, I would say. Certainly, cutting back inventory, reducing the number of suppliers we work with.

[18:10:03]

You know, we don't have access to the capital markets, so it's very tough on our cash flow. So, we've stretched and stretched and stretched. It's been very impactful.

TAPPER: Victor Schwartz --

SCHWARTZ: And (INAUDIBLE).

TAPPER: Victor Schwartz, congratulations on your big victory. I really appreciate you having you on.

And much more on our top story. In moments, I'm going to be joined live by the economist who was mentioned by President Trump during his remarks today. What did Stephen Moore and President Trump talk about when they met at the White House earlier? I'll ask him.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our Money Lead, the Supreme Court dealing a major blow to President Trump's economic agenda earlier today, ruling that President Trump's sweeping emergency tariffs are illegal. In remarks shortly after the decision, President Trump lashed out at the court attacking the justices in the 6-3 majority opinion, and announced he would rely on other legal authorities to keep tariffs in place, if not those specific tariffs.

[18:15:05]

Let's discuss with former Trump Adviser Stephen Moore, who President Trump said he met with yesterday to discuss the state of the economy. Stephen, let's start there. The president appeared to say that you told him the economy was booming because of the tariffs. If so, why do you think that is? And what happens next?

STEPHEN MOORE, FORMER TRUMP ECONOMIC ADVISER: Well, I didn't exactly say that. I did say to the president that we have a very strong economy, and I believe that, and I get -- I believe it's getting stronger. But, Jake, I'm going to have to be your two-handed economist today. On the one hand, on the other hand, on this decision, because, on the one hand, just as you had that interview with the with the man who brought this case, those tariffs have had a negative effect on many medium-sized business and small businesses, some retailers, manufacturers who've really been hurt by the tariffs. And so -- and I've never been a big fan of tariffs.

On the other hand, you know, one of the negative repercussions of this decision, Jake, will be the fact that Trump has been a kind of master negotiator with some of these other countries, whether China, Japan, Canada, the Europeans, in using the threat of these tariffs to get other countries to play by the rules, to reduce their tariffs out American goods and services and to bring hundreds of billions of dollars of capital in the United States. And guess what? Now with this Supreme Court decision, he can't play that card in negotiating, let's say, with the leaders of China. So, that weakens his hand.

TAPPER: I mean, just in point of fact that, as you know, the fees, the tariffs were paid by importers, not by the foreign countries. I know you know that.

What do you see as the immediate --

MOORE: But hold on, Jake. If that were the case, then why would they complain? Why would China complain? Look, there's all sorts of theories about who pays the tariffs. Certainly, consumers bear some of the costs, the importers bear the cost, but, certainly, the people in the countries that produce the goods and services pay. So, you know, it is an open question about who exactly pays, but, certainly, consumers do pay some of that cost. And it has had some negative effects, no question about it.

TAPPER: What do you see as the immediate impact of this U.S. Supreme Court decision for Americans as well as on a global scale?

MOORE: Well, you know, you several times have used and your correspondents have used the word, complicated, and that's, I think, the word of the day, complicated, because this was a complicated court decision. As you said, we don't even know yet whether these tariffs will have to be repaid by the government to the businesses that paid them. So, there's a lot to be sorted out here.

But I think that one of the points that Trump made is that this may benefit some of our enemies, like China, if they don't have to comply with the tariffs and some money. And, by the way, the tariffs have raised money for the United States government to reduce our deficit. And so $175 to $200 billion have been raised by the tariffs. If that money has to be returned, what impact will that have on our deficit and so on? So, there's a lot of open questions here that have to be handled.

TAPPER: After today's ruling, President Trump said he would now impose a global 10 percent tariff based on, I think, it's called Rule 122. What's your message to the president about that? I think it's limited to 150 days and then he has to get Congressional authorization. It's not in perpetuity. What might the impact of it be though?

MOORE: Well, you know, I've always felt like if, you know, an across the board tariff of say 10 or 15 percent, it would raise money. It might help some American businesses that compete with countries like Japan and China, et cetera. And so I wouldn't be totally opposed to that, especially if we use the money to reduce our deficit or to cut other taxes that hurt our businesses.

What I haven't liked is that the tax on things like steel and aluminum and coffee beans and so on, because those really have had a negative impact on the economy. And one of the reasons coffee prices went up, Jake, was because we had a tariff on coffee beans.

TAPPER: Yes. One of the interesting things from today's decision was a concurring opinion from Neil Gorsuch, whom the president appointed to the bench. And one of the things he said was, the way we do this is -- I'm paraphrasing, but the way we do this is we pass laws. We go to Congress, we pass laws.

MOORE: Yes.

TAPPER: Republicans control the House. Republicans control the Senate. Why not go to the House and Senate to get the kind of tariff regime that the president wants?

MOORE: Yes. Look, this is a really important point you're making, and I agree with it that the Constitution is pretty clear that tax bills start in the House of Representatives and the president does not have unilateral authority to raise tariffs, except in special cases of a national emergency or national security.

And so -- and I tell some of my conservative friends, look if Kamala Harris had won the presidency and she said that we've got a climate crisis and we have to tax other countries with tariffs, you know, we wouldn't like that too much.

[18:20:12]

So, I think the court made the right decision here in terms of saying, look, this has to be approved by Congress. And you're quite right. You know, if these tariffs are going to be imposed, the next step is to take it to the House and take it to the Senate and see if you can get the votes to do it. I doubt he can, but that is the next legal step to getting the tariffs imposed.

Stephen Moore, always good to have you on, sir. Thank you so much. Have a great weekend.

Coming up next, I'm going to be joined live by the state attorney general who's suing Apple, claiming that the company knowingly allowed the distribution of child sexual abuse material.

Stick with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Our Tech Lead now, West Virginia is suing Apple over allegations that the tech giant allows child sexual abuse material to be stored and distributed on its iCloud services. [18:25:05]

The lawsuit claims that Apple is prioritizing user privacy over child safety. Part of Apple's statement to CNN says, quote, at Apple, protecting the safety and privacy of our users, especially children, is central to what we do. We are innovating every day to combat ever evolving threats and maintain the safest, most trusted platform for kids, unquote.

Leading the lawsuit against Apple is West Virginia Attorney General J.B. McCuskey, who joins us now. General McCuskey, good to have you on the go.

What specific evidence does your office have to support these allegations against Apple?

JOHN MCCUSKEY (R), WEST VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Yes. So, the most important bit of evidence that we have, there's really two pieces, Jake. The first is that in 2024, Google and Meta reported almost 35 million CSAM of images to law enforcement, including the FBI, while Apple reported 248. So, what we know is that the technology exists for these images to be scanned and found and reported to the proper authorities. And not only do they exist, but they're being used by Apple's competitors in a way that is truly removing an enormous amount of this content from online.

The second thing we know is that Apple executives joked about their small level of reporting through CSAM, and even at one point saying, we believe Apple is the best conduit or the best platform for the distribution of child pornography in the world. And so these are facts and the technology exists and they're just not willing to do it.

TAPPER: So, in 2021, Apple abandoned its plan to check user's photos for child sexual abuse material because critics said it could undermine privacy for all of Apple's users. Now, you say that other companies are able to do it. I mean, I think like, you know, if I had magical powers and I said, okay, you can go find these horrible materials, but don't violate the privacy of people who aren't breaking the law, that would be great, but I don't know how that's done.

MCCUSKEY: Yes. So, it's actually a fairly simple process, Jake. And I will tell you, I'm not going to comment on whether or not you have magical powers or not. I'm sure some people think you do. But, you know, at the end of the day when we're getting 35 million of these images offline without harming the user privacy of everyone that uses Facebook and Google, which is basically everyone. What we know is this is doable.

And the other thing that we know is that our law enforcement partners, not just here in West Virginia, but nationwide, are clamoring for this to happen. Because just, one specific example, a friend of mine who owns a car dealership just the other day was selling a car to a guy, and he was swiping through his phone to show his insurance card that he had taken a picture of, and the salesperson saw child explicit material on his iPhone. And the only way that this person was found is because that salesperson was able to sell this person the car, call the authorities, and this guy opened up his phone for the authorities and he got arrested. This just happened three days ago.

TAPPER: So --

MCCUSKEY: And these are all images that can easily be found through A.I., through filtering products that both Google and Meta are using right now.

TAPPER: But don't those filtering -- again, I'm not -- I mean these materials are horrible and everybody should be arrested, but don't those filtering materials, whether it's A.I or whatever, isn't that violating people's privacy? I'm not taking a position here but is that not just like de facto on Facebook violating people's privacy?

MCCUSKEY: So, it's not pursuant to the agreement that people sign when they sign up for Facebook or use the Google Cloud. And Apple has specifically removed all language about their platform having any kind of filters at all.

And so, you know, I think the point here, Jake, is that God-fearing, decent Americans who are abhorred by these kinds of behaviors that people that target and harm children are fine with an anonymous A.I. platform looking through their photographs and making sure there aren't naked children in them.

TAPPER: Yes. I mean, I'm God-fearing and I find that abhorrent. I'm just raising the questions.

West Virginia Attorney General J.B. --

MCCUSKEY: No, I got you. I'm just sort of worked up on this one.

TAPPER: Yes. No, I hear you, but, I mean, you will acknowledge that there are concerns. You just don't agree with them.

MCCUSKEY: Yes. And so I think the concern is real, right? And to be fair, my kids have Apple products, I'm being broadcast to right now on an Apple iPad, and there's a lot of things that Apple does that makes it easier for me to be a parent. Time limits in their statements sort of speak to that. And they say, we want to protect children. Well, they do actually protect children from seeing bad images. What they don't do is protect children who are being trafficked and abused and having photographs taken of them.

And so they're really two different things and it's a little bit of a gaslighting exercise in their statement there just in general, in my opinion.

TAPPER: Attorney General J.B. McCuskey of the great State of West Virginia, thanks for coming on, I appreciate it, sir.

[18:30:02]

MCCUSKEY: Thanks, Jake. Have a great weekend, everybody.

TAPPER: You too.

And next, the school where teachers are trying to raise a generation that will transform the U.S. into what they call a Christian nation.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our National Lead, blurring the separation between church and state this week at the Pentagon, Douglas Wilson, a controversial pastor who believes that homosexuality should be a crime and supports repealing women's rights to vote and replacing it with household voting, well, that pastor led a worship service saying he had been invited by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

A Pentagon spokesman later put out a statement explaining, quote, Secretary Hegseth, along with millions of Americans, is a proud Christian and was glad to welcome Pastor Wilson to the Pentagon on Tuesday. Despite the left's efforts to remove our Christian heritage from our great nation, Secretary Hegseth is among those who embrace it.

A source who attended the service tells CNN that Wilson's message was pretty vanilla and steered clear of political rhetoric.

[18:35:00]

That was not the case last night in Tennessee, where Hegseth railed against what he called the godless left during a speech at a religious broadcasters convention.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: Gone is godless and divisive DEI. Gone is gender bending equity and quotas. Gone is climate change worship to a false God.

Ancient and godless societies viewed the individual as subordinate to the state or the collective. The Godless lefts today still sees it that way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Those attitudes are not just in effect that the Pentagon. CNN's Pamela Brown is here to tell us more.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, at the foundation of this Christian nationalist movement that Pastor Doug Wilson is a part of, as well as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is education. It's a key part of its mission. Today, more and more schools are teaching kids everything from a biblical perspective, and it's all part of this growing network of classical Christian schools. The hope is that students go on into powerful positions and spread a Christian message, basically to reconstruct society, to make America more Christian. Let's take a watch.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN (voice over): At classical Christian schools, religion isn't a standalone subject. It shapes every lesson from science to history, through a strict and literal biblical worldview. Each morning at this school, they even pledge allegiance to the Christian flag, not the American flag.

DAVID GOODWIN, PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF CLASSICAL CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS: We want to enculturate Christian kids. And when we say that, we mean deeply Christian kids, ones who think like biblical Christians all the way down.

BROWN: So, do you teach the kids here this is a Christian nation, this was founded as a Christian nation?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely, yes.

BROWN: Pastor Jeff's son, Caleb and daughter-in-law, E.J., are the headmaster and headmistress at the school where they plan to send their nine children. Kindley (ph) is also a teacher.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We want to equip students to go to higher places than we've gone to influence culture, like we want to make more Christians, we want to spread the gospel. So, as they're infiltrating into culture, they're influencing the culture to Christ.

BROWN: And so basically it's all part of a mission to make this a Christian nation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely.

BROWN: For some, the choice to place your kids in public schools isn't just wrong. It can be a sin.

Do you think it is a sin?

GOODWIN: Yes. I think it is because in most areas, the education is coming from the state, and that was not what God intended from the beginning. They don't raise children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. If you're a Christian, what justification do you have for putting a child in a situation where they're not getting that?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN (on camera): And, Jake, we had talked earlier about defense secretary Pete Hegseth. He has written about how he and his wife moved to Tennessee specifically to send their children to a classical Christian school. And David Goodwin ,and you heard there, runs that association. He also co-wrote a book with Hegseth on education.

So, you can start to see all these figures and ideologies are connected, something I explored closely in my upcoming documentary on The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper this Sunday at 8:00 P.M. Eastern and Pacific on CNN, or the next day on CNN's All Access streaming platform. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. Pamela Brown, thank you so much. Again, you can see The Whole Story, The Rise of Christian Nationalism, this Sunday at 8:00 P.M. on CNN and the next day on the CNN app.

Democratic governors are now demanding at the White House refund Americans after Trump's tariffs were ruled illegal by the U.S. Supreme Court. But will you see any of that money? That's next.

Plus, President Trump says he's ordering the release of government files on aliens. So, what may be in there? I'm going to ask the producer and director of the Age of Disclosure documentary. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

TAPPER: Our Politics Lead now, the Supreme Court struck down President Trump's sweeping tariff regime earlier today. And moments ago, the president posted on Truth Social, quote, it is my great honor to have just signed from the Oval Office a global 10 percent tariff on all countries, which will be effective almost immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Here to discuss are Jamil Jaffer, the founder and executive director of National Security Institute, and a former law clerk for Justice Neil Gorsuch is, well, joining is Mo Elleithee, former DNC communications director.

So, we should just know you clerked for Gorsuch.

JAMIL JAFFER, FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SECURITY INSTITUTE: I did.

TAPPER: So, I'm going to ask you to, you know, use your powers of Gorsuch whispering and reading. President Trump had strong criticism for all six in the majority, but specifically for Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Gorsuch, whom he appointed and whom voted against him today. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: They're just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats.

They're very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution.

REPORTER: Do you regret nominating them?

TRUMP: I don't want to say whether or not I regret. I think their decision was terrible, yes.

I think it's an embarrassment to their families, if you want to know the truth?

(END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: He also went on to suggest with no evidence that he thinks it's his opinion that these people, I guess, all six who ruled against him are in the pocket of like foreign businesses or something like that. What do you make of all this?

JAFFER: I mean, it's ridiculous, right? The president's just wrong. Neil Gorsuch, the other justices up there, they're doing law. You can agree with them, you can disagree with them. Saying they're disloyal to the constitution, suggesting they're in the pockets of foreign adversaries, I mean, the whole thing is outrageous. It's wrong, it's not acceptable, and it's not appropriate for a president of the United States to be talking about the United States Supreme Court in that manner.

TAPPER: Do you remember in 2010 when Obama gave his State of the Union address and criticized the decision of the court in the Citizens United, he said it was dead wrong, and so many Republican senators and everybody on Fox, everybody was so offended that the president had, you know, criticized the Supreme Court decision in front of the Supreme Court justices.

[18:45:09]

Where are all these guys now?

MO ELLEITHEE, FORMER DNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Yeah, exactly. And I'm also old enough to remember when it was mainstream conservative ideology to be opposed to these kinds of tariffs, right?

I mean, and now he's calling them RINOs. But yeah, I mean, president took a major political hit today, a major policy hit today. His entire rationale, his presidency has rested on these tariffs. I've never truly understood why politically because they are so unpopular and they are hurting so many people. But that's what he was leaning into.

For the first time in a really substantive way, the Supreme Court said, you know what buddy? Like there is a Constitution.

TAPPER: Yeah.

ELLEITHEE: Article One gives this power to the Congress. If you want to do it, do it, but do it the right way through Congress.

TAPPER: Yeah, we had Stephen Moore on earlier, a big ally of the president and I think he said something along the lines of, there probably aren't the votes for it.

ELLEITHEE: Right.

TAPPER: Some Republicans, Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, praised the ruling. Others have slammed it. Senator Bernie Moreno of Ohio called the ruling outrageous and said it, quote, "handcuffs our fight against unfair trade that has devastated American workers for decades."

Congressman Buddy Carter, I believe of Georgia, posted, quote, "The Supreme Court just undercut the president's ability to defend American workers."

There is an argument that, you know, the president was trying to undo what a lot of people, probably everybody here at this table would agree have been some very unfortunate decisions made by U.S. leaders in terms of trade deals that have hurt the American working class.

JAFFER: I think that's right. And that's fine. The president has the ability to take those actions if he chooses to. He just had to do it the way that Congress has authorized him to do it here. He tried to use a broad statute in a very aggressive way and we've seen the court pull that authority back for a while. The court gave, you know, presidency authority to run around, have federal agencies do all sorts of things within broad statutory authorities. Conservatives on the Supreme Court have pulled that power back, joined at times by liberals.

And that's the right thing, because that's what the Constitution provides it says that Congress makes the laws, not the president. He makes it in consultation with Congress, he vetoes or signs bills, but he's going to make laws on his own if Congress grants the authority if the Constitution grants Congress the authority, it's their job. They have to do their job right or wrong. That's what the Supreme Court decided today and that's the right answer.

TAPPER: Mo, this is -- this is interesting. I want you to weigh in on both the presidents, vice presidents weighed in the former and the current. The current vice president, J.D. Vance, called Supreme Court ruling, quote, "lawlessness from the court, plain and simple." Former Vice President Mike Pence, more traditional Republican, called the ruling a, quote, "victory for the American people and a win for the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution of the United States."

ELLEITHEE: Yeah. Well, I mean it doesn't surprise me that the current vice president would take the tone he took because, you know, that's what his boss requires. But I agree with the former vice president that this is a victory for separation of powers as enshrined in the Constitution.

But also, to your earlier point about whether or not the president's approach was designed to help the American people, there are plenty of examples of where tariffs have actually helped to level the playing field and been helpful, but they were strategic. They were targeted.

The fact that this president took the approach he took illegally, but took the approach he took with these widespread universal tariffs, ended up hurting us. It ended up hurting us by increasing what people's out-of-pocket costs by like 1,700 bucks a year. It ended up hurting us in our alliances and our relationships with our trading partners. It emboldened China, who was just funneling their goods through other countries.

TAPPER: Right.

ELLEITHEE: All for all of these reasons, it didn't help the American people. And now we've learned it was also illegal. TAPPER: Very short, if you can. Please interpret Gorsuch as his concurring opinion, in which he basically said legislating is hard. Was he -- was he talking to the country, or do you think he was talking to President Trump?

JAFFER: I think he was talking to the country. I think he was making clear that the Constitution sets out a separation of powers. Congress makes the laws, the president carries them out, and the Constitution gives the power to tax and impose tariffs to Congress. You have to respect that.

You have to make the laws. If that's how you want to do it, you have to follow the laws. If you're the president, this was a clear message from president -- from Justice Gorsuch to the country. We're going to do law in Supreme Court, not politics.

Say what you want, Mr. President, they're going to do the law.

TAPPER: Yeah, it was very Schoolhouse Rock to me. I'm just a bill.

Thanks to both of you. Appreciate it.

Now to our pop culture lead, the final words of actor Eric Dane, who tragically died yesterday just 10 months after going public with his diagnosis of ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease. The 53-year-old actor, best known for the iconic roles of Dr. Mark McSteamy Sloan on "Grey's Anatomy" and Kal Jacobs on "Euphoria", recorded a secret interview with host and director and producer Brad Falchuk for the new Netflix series "Famous Last Words", interviews that are conducted and then released after somebody passes away.

[18:50:08]

The first one was Jane Goodall, the second one Eric Dane. In the interview, Dane reflects on his marriage to actress Rebecca Gayheart and leaves this message to his two daughters Billie and Georgia.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC DANE, ACTOR: I hope I've demonstrated that you can face anything. You can face the end of your days, you can face hell with dignity. Fight, girls, and hold your heads high. Billie and Georgia, you are my heart, you are my everything. Good night. I love you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Wow. Our heart goes out to Rebecca and Billie and Georgia and the rest of Eric's family and friends.

What a loss. May his memory be a blessing.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:55:05] TAPPER: In our out of this world lead, President Trump says he's directing the release of government files related to aliens, extraterrestrial life, UFOs and unidentified aerial phenomena, otherwise known as UAPs. This announcement comes just a few months after the documentary "Age of Disclosure" debuted at number one on Amazon Prime, prompting a huge conversation about aliens and what the government knows. The film's director and producer, Dan Farah, says his interviews reveal evidence of how deep the secrecy goes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was recruited to a highly sensitive government program that investigated unidentified aerial phenomena.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For over 16 years, on behalf of the U.S. government, I worked as a senior intelligence official on the unidentified aerial phenomena topic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We learned that the U.S. government was involved in a long running secret war with other nations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: And Farah joins us now.

Dan, welcome back to THE LEAD and congratulations on all the conversation this has prompted. It's not difficult to think that there's a line from your film to Brian Tyler Cohen asking Obama that question, which prompted Obama -- Trump doing this.

Why do you think President Trump wants to release the files?

DAN FARAH, DIRECTOR AND PRODUCER, "THE AGE OF DISCLOSURE": Look, I think that there's clearly a huge appetite to learn the truth about this topic, you know, my film reveals there's been an 80-year cover up of the existence of non-human, intelligent life. And the truth has been hidden from the public congress and even sitting presidents.

So I think that the film, the release of it opened everyone's eyes to the fact that the truth has been hidden. And President Trump is responding to the public demand.

TAPPER: You explain this in the film but why do you think it would be hidden from presidents? Obama even alluded to that. The idea that I mean, he was he was kind of dismissing it, but the notion that there would be a conspiracy to hide this from the president. What -- your film, you know, posits that it is hidden. Why?

FARAH: Well, look, it's broken down in detail in a number of the interviews. But even Secretary Rubio in the film talks about how it's the permanent bureaucracy that is able to keep these secrets. Presidents are there for four to eight years. They come and go. But the permanent bureaucracy can stay there for decades.

And that permanent bureaucracy within different elements of government has been able to keep this hidden for 80 years. TAPPER: What do you hope to see in the files when they're released?

FARAH: I think there's a lot that's going to be revealed. You know, an important thing to remember is disclosure is going to be a process. It's not a singular event. It's going to have a lot of milestones and a lot of hurdles.

My -- the release of my film is a major milestone. Obama's comments, a milestone. Trump's presidential order is a major milestone. There's going to be more milestones and there's going to be pushback. The people inside of the U.S. government that have been involved in covering this up they're going to continue to try to cover it up.

There's going to be pushback to this historic disclosure moment. And we're just going to all have to keep pressure on and keep driving it forward so it stays. The national conversation and national priority until we have full disclosure.

TAPPER: The last time you were on the show, you spoke about the secret cold war with adverse nations to reverse-engineer the non-human technology. In other words, there are these craft that crash or whatever and then to reverse engineer, figure out how they were built.

What do you expect the international implications will be when these files are released?

FARAH: I think there's already major geopolitical repercussions and consequences to this big presidential order that that Trump just did. The rest of the world now knows we're taking this extremely seriously. We're putting an end to the antiquated, illogical stigma that has existed around this topic in our society, and we're making it a national priority.

That alone is an escalation of the situation. We'll now have more resources put towards this more brainpower put towards this, and we'll be better positioned to win this, this high stakes technology race we're in with adversaries.

TAPPER: There is going to be a huge effort by the government no doubt, to redact as much as possible.

FARAH: I'm sure there's going to be a lot of pushback. But the people that have covered this up for 80 years have done it very effectively, and there's no reason to think that they're going to stop.

TAPPER: Dan Farah, thank you so much. Congratulations. I can't think of any -- anything that a documentary filmmaker wants more than impact. And you certainly have caused it. Have a good weekend.

FARAH: Thank you. Thank you.

TAPPER: Coming up Sunday on "STATE OF THE UNION," an exclusive interview with California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom. Look for that Sunday morning at 9:00 Eastern and again at noon here on CNN.

And next week, CNN, of course is going to have special coverage of President Trump's first State of the Union Address of his second term. That will be Tuesday night. Look for the speech, plus in-depth analysis before and after the address. That's next Tuesday night starting at 8:00 Eastern. Watch on CNN or on the new CNN app.

And until then, you can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Bluesky, X and on TikTok @jaketapper. You can follow the show on X and Instagram @TheLeadCNN. If you ever miss an episode, you can watch the show on the CNN app. You should be downloading it right now. You should be downloading the app.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now. Take it away, Erin.