Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Judge Aileen Cannon Holds Hearing On Donald Trump's Request To Declare Special Counsel Jack Smith's Appointment Invalid; Supreme Court Upholds Law Banning Domestic Abusers From Owning Guns; CBP: Migrant Arrests Fall Sharply After President Joe Biden's New Asylum Restrictions; Donald Trump: Foreign Nationals Who Graduate College Should Get Green Cards; FAA Investigating Southwest Airlines For Low Altitude Incident. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired June 21, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:01:13]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: The fate of the classified documents case against Donald Trump has been decided in the Florida courtroom. The judge appointed by Trump when he was president is now hearing his longshot argument over whether the prosecutor should even be on the case.

And a major guns case, the Supreme Court handing a victory to advocates in favor of restrictions on the Second Amendment. And they set up what will be a historic week of decisions for the high court.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: And a disturbing death toll at the annual Hajj in Mecca. Pilgrims dying in staggering numbers. Apparent victims of high temperatures and that brutal heat could actually grow worse in coming years.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

Right now, attorneys for former President Trump are in a federal courtroom in Florida arguing that the charges in Trump's classified documents case should be dismissed, claiming that Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed.

At the heart of their argument is that Jack Smith was never confirmed by the U.S. Senate and because of that, all of his office's work should be nullified and the charges against their client dropped.

Trump appointed Judge Aileen Cannon has faced criticism for her handling of the case, especially for how long she is taking to settle Trump's legal challenges.

Our team inside Court tells us that today, Judge Cannon pushed Trump's team to defend one of their most outlandish claims against Jack Smith, that he is somehow part of a "shadow government."

We have CNN's Katelyn Polantz joining us now. Katelyn, how does it appear things are going for the Trump team as they make this push?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, they're getting a lot of questions from Judge Cannon. But she doesn't often reveal how she's leaning in these hearings. So, we're just getting snippets of questions she's asking.

It's a long hearing today, too, and not one where she's expected to rule. In fact, we know she's not going to rule on this because she wants to do part two of these arguments Monday morning.

So, this is going to be a lot of time devoted to this question of the power of the special counsel, is it constitutional for this type of prosecutor to bring a case in federal court against anyone? Let it be Donald Trump or someone else.

And in this case, what the arguments often were about this morning from these pieces of information we're getting out of that courthouse where there's no electronics allowed inside.

This morning, the team from Donald Trump's team, they were arguing about the closeness or how distant there might be, distance between the Attorney General Merrick Garland and Special Counsel Jack Smith, if that's legal, and the one thing that they keep asking for in this is more hearings, they're asking for it with this before Judge Cannon, they want more evidence to be able to talk to people from the Justice Department in court or have some sort of testimony about Jack Smith and Merrick Garland. And then we're going to hear that again Monday and Tuesday as these arguments go on.

They just want more hearings from Judge Cannon and this is a judge who it has become quite clear wants to look at so many things here, the sort of things that more experienced judges might not actually devote that much time to.

KEILAR: Yes, they just decide they -- right? They just sort of read some of the filings and don't have a hearing and she seems to be having hearings on everything.

POLANTZ: Hours and hours of hearings. Lots of trips to Florida.

KEILAR: Lots of busy work. All right, Katelyn Polantz, thank you so much. Boris?

SANCHEZ: A major win for victims of domestic violence as the Supreme Court rules on a Second Amendment case.

In a nearly unanimous decision, the justices upheld the law that bars domestic abusers from owning guns. The lone dissenting voice was Justice Clarence Thomas.

[14:05:04]

Let's turn now to CNN Legal Affairs Correspondent -- Chief Legal Affairs Correspondent Paula Reid. Paula, walk us through the justification for this decision from the court. PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Boris, a major Second Amendment ruling here from the High Court effectively ruling that like all other rights, the Second Amendment has limits.

Now, here, the Chief Justice John Roberts, he said the court had, "No trouble reaching this 8-1 decision," writing, "Our tradition of firearm regulation allows the government to disarm individuals who present a credible threat to the physical safety of others."

And it's that word tradition that's really key here Boris, because in this opinion, they take time to analyze and recount the history of this country. And that is critical because in 2022, the Supreme Court really broadened the definition of the Second Amendment.

Also insisted that in order to restrict Second Amendment rights, you needed to find some analog in history. And here the court clarified that you don't need to find necessarily a, "Twin regulation in history, but something that is similar."

And they acknowledged that that earlier opinion has caused some confusion in the lower courts, writing, some courts have misunderstood the methodology of our recent Second Amendment cases, the reach of the Second Amendment is not limited only to those arms that were in existence at the founding.

And they extend that to say, of course, you cannot find necessarily a twin regulation if you go back to the 1700s. Some justice has pointed out in oral arguments that, of course, domestic violence has not always been treated the same way over the course of the history of this country as it is today.

Now, there is of course the dissent that you noted, Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting, the lone dissenter, writing, "Yet in the interest of ensuring the government can regulate one subset of society, today's decision puts at risk the Second Amendment rights of many more, I respectfully dissent."

Now looking forward, Boris. It's interesting, because even though this was 8-1, many of the justices also wrote concurring opinions, putting sort of their spin on the majority opinion.

Going forward, we expect there will certainly be more Second Amendment challenges trying to clarify exactly what the restrictions are that you can put on firearm ownership. But now, challengers, they're going to be able to go through these concurrences and likely find a lot of different things that they can say supports their case.

So, there will definitely be more challenges to come to the Second Amendment interpretation from the High Court.

SANCHEZ: No question about that. Those opinions are combed through very carefully.

And Paula, it seems like the court is packing a punch for next week because they've got some pretty big cases and decisions that have yet to come out. REID: Absolutely. Usually, they save their biggest cases until the very end, next week, possibly it could go into the following week. But we're still waiting, like you said, there's some really big outstanding cases.

The biggest one that a lot of folks are talking about is former President Trump's claim of immunity. This is something that has put the federal prosecution of the former president related to January 6th, and elections diversion on hold. So, we're watching and waiting to see what the High Court does there.

There's also a related case about January 6th, and being able to charge people who participated in the insurrection with obstruction. There's also a big abortion ruling that we are waiting for.

There was a question on chemical abortion and use of mifepristone. The justices sort of swerved around that, didn't answer that question. But there is a really important question out of Idaho. What do you do when it comes to emergency room care when you have a more permissive federal law and a more restrictive state law when it comes to when abortions can be performed? Waiting for that decision.

Also, huge decision are related to the power of federal agencies, and then a few cases related to the government's ability to pressure or control social media.

So, next week could be a jam packed week full of big headlines out of the Supreme Court, but again, they have no bosses. They have lifetime appointments, Boris, if they want to go into the next week, they can do that too.

SANCHEZ: They can and leave us all in suspense. Paula Reid, thanks so much. Brianna?

KEILAR: It's been a little more than two weeks since President Biden's new asylum restrictions went into effect and we're learning the number of people entering the country illegally at the U.S.-Mexico border has fallen sharply.

According to border officials, arrests at ports of entry have decreased by 25 percent. New statistics also showed daily encounters along the border dropping nine percent in May.

Biden's new plan allows the administration to ban asylum seekers who crossed the southern border illegally once a daily threshold is met. And the measure would be lifted once daily encounters fall to 1,500.

Let's talk more about this now with former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement under President Obama, John Sandweg.

So, thanks for being with us. I wonder why you see this drop that we're seeing or what you think about what we're seeing with this drop right now and how the numbers compared to what Border Patrol typically sees around this time of the year in past years? [14:10:02]

JOHN SANDWEG, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, Brianna, obviously, it's good news. This is significant. It's a significant drop, it's indicative that the new rule is probably working. But at the same time, it's definitely too early to tell, right?

We've seen in the past when we've implemented new measures at the border, whether it was President Trump's with his Remain in Mexico rule, or even President Biden remember when Title 42 expired, and the border was reopened. He implemented a new asylum rule.

We saw a real drop in migration immediately thereafter, sustained for a month or two and then it kind of picked back up.

And I think the smugglers and the migrant groups at the border are kind of taking a wait and see approach, to see how the new rule is implemented.

Look, the rule is really important. But of course it wasn't paired with the resources that the Border Patrol agents really need or the immigration courts need. So, the effectiveness of the rule, you know, he's going to -- we're going to find out over the next couple of months.

So, I'd say, very encouraged by this initial tranche of data. But let's see where we are, you know, as we get into August, September, October.

KEILAR: So, two weeks may actually be not enough time to establish a clear trend because of cartels and others who are trying to figure out if they need to game the system.

SANDWEG: Yes, they're going to -- listen, we're going to -- there's going to be a reaction to this rule, right? So, the first thing I think that happens is the smugglers who really drive all the migration are and are telling the migrants what to do, they're waiting to see how this kind of works, there's test groups going over. And they'll see if it's effective in terms of getting people back to their country, and whether they want to shift tactics. So, what we've seen historically is this kind of drop and then a pick back up.

I think it's also just early because remember, we were kind of seeing a decline at the border, not a -- not a major decline, but leading into May, April's numbers were down. And a lot of that was attributed to stepped up enforcement efforts in Mexico.

So, as Mexico continues to do a better job of blocking these migrants from getting to Mexico in the first place, right, that's going to drive down our numbers.

So, I guess, look, I'd be very encouraged. I'd be very worried if we didn't see a drop at all. And I'd be very encouraged if I was the administration. But again, I wouldn't declare victory yet. I want to wait and see till we get a little more data. KEILAR: So, John, I wonder because earlier this month, there were four

migrants who died along the U.S. border because of extreme heat in the region. How much does heat deter crossings?

SANDWEG: You know, it does, Brianna. Look, historically, what we've always seen is a real -- there's seasonal flows to this. Now, the only reason that I hesitate in saying that is since this mass migration began, some of that seasonality has dissipated a bit. We've seen elevated numbers into May and into June.

But you are absolutely right. Historically, spring, you know, is the big influx at the border. And then the numbers dissipate pretty extensively when it gets hot in the summer, and then pick back up again.

But I'll say one other thing, Brianna, about deaths at the border. And one thing that concerns me is, you know, there's always an unintended consequence to everything we do at the border, right? And the one thing I think we need to be on guard for here is the changing tactics of the smuggling groups, right?

Prior to 2016, what we almost exclusively saw at the border were groups who would sneak into the United States and try to evade the Border Patrol agents and work their way into the cities without getting caught.

What we -- as you know, very well, we've seen lately is where they surrender, get apprehended and make an asylum claim.

If asylum is viewed no longer as a viable path, I worry that we're going to start seeing those incursions in the desert, and now you're talking extreme heat. Unfortunately, that means that leads to migrant deaths.

KEILAR: I do want to play something that President Trump -- former President Trump recently said, because in a new interview, he broke from his push to curb both illegal and legal immigration. And he made a promise if he's reelected, here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What I want to do, and what I will do is you graduate from a college, I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country. And that includes junior colleges too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: That is a big change, John, what do you make of that?

SANDWEG: It's certainly a stunning turn in rhetoric, right? Not the kind of thing we're expecting to hear from him.

I mean, look, Trump has been making these promises to his supporters about these increased enforcement that just don't match reality, Brianna. I mean, that's a separate topic, really. But these promises of mass deportations that given the legal framework, the challenges in the immigration courts even not discussed is just not possible.

But look, this is a stunning turn for him. Obviously, this is what's called the Staple Act. It's an idea that's bounced around Congress and been part of all the immigration reform packages for a long time. The idea that we take people here, we educate them, we get some incredibly bright people and then there's no functional path to allow them to stay in this country.

So, look, obviously the policy makes good sense. I'm not sure about the politics, but it's surprising to hear Trump say that for sure.

KEILAR: Yes. Seems like a lot of politics at play there.

John Sandweg, great to have you. Thank you so much.

SANDWEG: My pleasure.

KEILAR: Still ahead. The FAA investigating after a Southwest Airlines plane flew so low to the ground, it rattled homes and woke people up. You can see it on a doorbell camera here, what we know about what went wrong.

Plus, two astronauts remain in space as Boeing races to understand issues with the spacecraft that is supposed to bring them home. What is at stake here?

[14:15:06]

And thousands of car dealerships in the U.S. and Canada are at a near standstill. A three second cyber incident knocked out computer systems.

We have those stories and more ahead on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: There's some new video into CNN we want to share with you of a Southwest flight and how close it got to an Oklahoma neighborhood after it flew at a low altitude. It was still nine miles from the airport at this point. This is security camera footage from a school near Oklahoma City and it captures the plane flying low to the ground shortly after midnight on Wednesday.

[14:20:19]

KEILAR: The FAA says the flight descended to just 525 feet as it was approaching the airport but still a ways out. And that triggered a low altitude warning from air traffic controllers.

We have CNN Aviation Correspondent Pete Muntean joining us now with the details. Walk us through what happened and what the airline's saying.

PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: Super alarming here. The good news is that air traffic controllers really saved the day here, especially alarming since this is the second incident in as many months of involving a Southwest flight getting too low.

This case happened just after midnight Wednesday morning. Let's look at the doorbell video again just in the CNN. It shows flight 4069 on approach to land at Will Rogers World Airport in Oklahoma City. This is about nine miles away from the airport in the town of Yukon, Oklahoma.

The plane was lined up to land on the runway at Oak City that points to the southeast and the data from flight radar 24 says the flight got down to 525 feet above ground level, let's put it into context. It's only four lengths of the 737 itself or the height of the Washington Monument, half the height of the Empire State Building.

Point is, it's very low for that distance from the airport and the FAA says a minimum safe altitude warning or MSAW alarm sounded in the control tower prompting the air traffic controller in the tower to issue Southwest 4069 a low altitude alert, listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONTROLLER: Southwest 4069 low altitude alert. You good out there?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MUNTEAN: Now, the pilots then climb back up and maneuvered for a safe landing, nobody hurt here. The FAA says it's investigating.

Southwest also doing its own internal investigation. And here's what the airline says in a statement. Southwest is following its robust safety management system in contact with the FAA to understand and address any irregularities with the aircraft's approach to the airport. Nothing is more important to Southwest than the safety of our customers and employees.

The question here is how this could happen? Did the pilots improperly configured their instruments like the crash of a Korean Air Flight in Guam in 1997 were they simply fatigued after a long day? Remember, this flight was coming in well after midnight.

Pilots I talked to say they've been worked especially hard lately. Really big questions for investigators here.

The good news is that the layers of safety work, the low altitude alerting system in use by air traffic control stopped the accident chain that was barreling towards disaster. This could have been really bad.

SANCHEZ: Yes, definitely. Fortunate that no one was hurt and that the system actually worked.

MUNTEAN: Right.

SANCHEZ: Pete Muntean, thank you so much.

MUNTEAN: Any time. SANCHEZ: Let's dig deeper on this with CNN Transportation Analyst and former Inspector General for the Department of Transportation Mary Schiavo.

Mary, we of course have to point out for the sake of transparently -- transparency that you have ongoing litigation against Boeing from a 2019 crash. But focusing on the Southwest incident, Pete laid out some of the potential things that could have occurred, how does something like this happen? And what do you see in the information we now have about what took place?

MARY SCHIAVO, CNN TRANSPORTATION ANALYST: Right, well, Pete laid it out very well, because by that plane descending to 525 feet that far from the airport, several warnings should have been going off. Of course, the air traffic control gave the warning as Pete mentioned, vitally lifesaving.

But in that cockpit where there would have been other warnings going off. On my modern aircraft, the controls tell you when you're on the glide slope, the path to the runway that you've selected, it tells you if you're the right altitude, and at this point, have they gone below 500 feet, they literally would have gotten the ground proximity warning, the plane would have yelled at them pull up, pull up.

So, how they could have missed -- two pilots could have missed so many clues coming from their instruments and you know, the instruments are great, and they're two of them for the critical instruments is really a mystery.

I did listen to the air traffic control tapes. And when the air traffic controller asked them, you know, gave them the low altitude warning and said, is everything OK? They were a little slow to respond. So, I suppose it is possible there was already something going wrong. They had heard the alerts, they were trying to address the problem. Or maybe they were engaged in something else.

There have been accidents because pilots were busy attending to some other problem and didn't watch their speed and didn't watch their altitude and a perfectly good plane can be lost that way.

KEILAR: So, we see the plane from various angles of camera shots from the ground. I mean, even, you know, people just with their general surveillance cameras from their home. What should the pilots have seen visually? This isn't like they were in a clouded situation, at least for part of this.

[14:25:08]

SCHIAVO: Right, well, most importantly, they would have seen their instruments, they would have known that they were not on the correct path to the airport that they were too low.

I mean, it shows up very clearly on modern aircraft, whether you're on the correct angle to the airport or not, you would also have seen the, you know, looked outside the window and of course, seeing the ground. And when you've flown for a while, you get pretty good at judging your altitude without even looking at the altimeter, which of course you look at all the time. So, they would have seen this.

So, again, with this going on with this flight, the flight in Hawaii that Pete mentioned, that got down to in the 400 feet range. This is something that is very troubling. And this is something that Southwest has to address, there could be a mechanical cause or maybe their instruments are failing, these were 737 aircraft, they've had other problems with the aircraft.

They had an aircraft just a couple of weeks ago that had damaged from a maneuver that was un-commanded called a Dutch roll. That's where the plane kind of whoops back and forth, side to side.

And then there have been reports that they were smoking the cabin from a couple of 737 aircraft that they were flying in December of last year was one and then another one, a couple months later.

So, pilot error or problems with the aircraft, someone's really got to get a handle on this and that someone is of course Southwest Airlines and the Federal Aviation Administration, which has already looked into many of these incidents and is investigating.

SANCHEZ: Mary Schiavo, appreciate the analysis and your snazzy background as well.

SCHIAVO: Thank you. Zooming.

SANCHEZ: Still ahead, hundreds passing away of extreme heat during this year's Hajj pilgrimage. People walking in 120 degree heat to get to Mecca. We'll talk about what Egypt is now doing to help alleviate the crisis.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)