Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Next Hour: Hearing On Mistakenly Deported Maryland Man As Trump Administration Accused Of Defying Courts; Trump Threatens Harvard's Tax-Exempt Status After Freezing Funds; Progress Stalls On U.S.-EU Trade Deal Talks; White House: Trump "Actively" Considering At Least 15 Trade Deals; Xi Looks To Strengthen Ties In Southeast Asia In Face Of U.S. Tariffs. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired April 15, 2025 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:00:30]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Just one hour from now, a federal court will again consider the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. The Maryland man mistakenly deported to El Salvador. His lawyers are arguing that the White House must ask for his release, even as the President Trump and El Salvador's president argue their hands are tied.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: President Trump takes on Harvard after the university says it will not comply with policy demands from the White House. The administration moves to freeze over $2 billion in grants. And Trump is suggesting that the school could lose its tax-exempt status.

And Joe Biden is back, the former president, joining the fight against Donald Trump. But will Democrats welcome him with open arms?

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

SANCHEZ: Coming up in the next hour, a critical hearing in the case of a Maryland man mistakenly deported to El Salvador, now locked inside the country's notorious CECOT prison. Justice Department lawyers are going to face a federal judge who's ordered the Trump administration to, quote, "facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia." But Trump officials and El Salvador's president have made clear he will not be sent back to the U.S. CNN's Paula Reid is following this case for us.

So Paula, what are we expecting to come out of this hearing?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, I expect this will be pretty contentious. Because in the last hearing just a few days ago, it's clear the judge was frustrated with the Justice Department for not being more forthcoming about details, about how they were trying to facilitate this man's return.

Now, a lot has happened since then. She did order the government to offer daily status updates on the steps that they are taking, again, to facilitate his return. They have been submitting those. They have been a little bit late. And yesterday, in their report that they filed with the court, they sort of ended by pointing to what happened in that Oval Office meeting yesterday, where the President of El Salvador made it clear that he wasn't going to send this man back, sort of inferring that that should be the last word in this case.

But earlier this morning, Abrego Garcia's lawyers filed, saying that they believe that the Justice Department should be doing a lot more, including requesting the release of their client.

Now, the judge, again, frustrated with the Department of Justice, both sides frustrated with one another. And while the administration has conceded that this was an error, deporting this man to El Salvador, a lot of this second phase of confusion and frustration can be rooted in the Supreme Court's decision.

Last week, they were asked to evaluate the three points in the district court's order, which said that the government needed to facilitate and effectuate his return and give a deadline of Monday, April 17. And I want to be clear, the Supreme Court said that, yes, they need to facilitate his return. But when it comes to effectuating it, they tossed it back down to the lower court.

They said, you need to clarify what did you mean by that and you have to be deferential to the executive branch and gave no deadline. So, while there have been questions about whether the administration is defying this court order, really, if you read the text of the Supreme Court order and what the administration is saying, instead they're just really exploiting the intentional ambiguity of the Supreme Court order from last week.

Now, of course, this could go back up to the Supreme Court for clarification. But it's unlikely that justices are going to want to revisit this issue.

SANCHEZ: Yes, it's really a fascinating case. Both sides reading that decision to the direction that they would like.

Paula Reid, thank you so much for the update. Jessica?

DEAN: And joining us now to discuss this former federal prosecutor, Elliot Williams. He's also former Assistant Director for Legislative Affairs at Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Elliot, good to see you.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hey.

DEAN: Look, the Trump administration, the President himself, the President of El Salvador, have made it very clear they have no intention of bringing him back. We looked at this hearing today. What are you watching for as we watch this?

WILLIAMS: One, how mad is the judge at the litigants. It's no secret that the judge is frustrated here. Everyone who's appeared in a court at some point gets under a judge's skin. But to Paula's reporting, the government has been late on some of his filings back to her and not been entirely forthcoming.

Now, the other thing is, she has clear directions from the Supreme Court as to sort of frame out or define what it means to effectuate his return to the United States. So, I'm looking for what is she going to tell them to do, and are they going to do it once they get those directions from her?

[15:05:03]

DEAN: Yes. And so, does it all kind of come down to this idea of what facilitate actually means? Because the Trump administration says it means we would give them a plane.

WILLIAMS: Right.

DEAN: And what effectuate actually means.

WILLIAMS: Right. And welcome to the world of high-stakes --

DEAN: Of the world of - yes, law.

WILLIAMS: -- constitutional lawyering, though, and just - no, but seriously, this idea of what do these terms mean, the basic meaning.

DEAN: Yes.

WILLIAMS: But also the legal definitions.

Now, the Trump administration is saying that in the immigration context, facilitate only means domestically get someone out of the country or take the steps to do so. It's probably broader than that, and I would think that the Supreme Court probably meant something broader than that. But do they mean as much as, well, you know, go over to El Salvador and get the guy out of there? Probably not. And so there's going to be certainly more action from the district court, the trial court here to try to sort that out.

DEAN: And so let's say that he is brought back. What's to stop the administration from turning around and deporting him again?

WILLIAMS: Well, nothing as long as they do it pursuant to law. Now, again, he has something that's called withholding of removal. He was, you know, he came to the country unlawfully, but was granted status in the country because of the conditions in El Salvador. It happens all the time. And quite frankly, this happened in 2019 under the last Trump administration. Let's be clear.

Now, he could be removed to another country, presumably. So, if he were to come back here, they could say, look, we're not going to remove you back to El Salvador pursuant to law.

DEAN: Right.

WILLIAMS: But we can take you to Venezuela or Honduras or Mexico or someone else. So, no, they're not precluded under the law from returning him. Now, the question is, do they follow any process? And they haven't given any signs that they really want to do so.

DEAN: Yes. I also heard from President Trump yesterday talking about the - his openness, I think is fair to say - to sending what he called homegrown criminals, U.S. citizens to El Salvador. Is ...

WILLIAMS: No. No.

DEAN: ... the legality of that seems impossible?

WILLIAMS: It is. And the camera was on your face and I was shaking my head.

DEAN: You were making the - yes, yes.

WILLIAMS: But no, look, there are issues on which reasonable minds can differ. Democrats, Republicans, different litigants. And there are some things that are truth or facts that cannot be denied. It is a fact that American law, the American Constitution and American history does not allow for the detention or incarceration of American citizens on foreign soil, period. The idea that the President is just putting it out there and just testing it as an idea is preposterous. It's nonsense. There is just no basis for that.

And to be clear, rather than just this moral lofty stuff I'm saying here, it's grounded in the Constitution. The Eighth Amendment, we've heard about it. Many people don't know what it is, but prevents cruel and unusual punishment. We can't, as Americans, send people to be incarcerated in foreign prisons that we don't know the standards of and so on. It's not about being touchy-feely to criminals and being soft.

DEAN: Right.

WILLIAMS: This is what the law says. It does not allow it. There's no basis for what the President said yesterday.

DEAN: And it really just brings us back to what we see again and again and again and probably will continue to see is just how far they can push, right, when it comes to the law.

WILLIAMS: And is it just a joke and just floating an idea? Well, it's an idea that's not based in reality. And I'm glad we can talk about it and make clear that, again, this isn't a question of Elliot's opinion.

DEAN: If you like it. If you don't, right.

WILLIAMS: No, if you like it. If you don't. This is established and any law professor, analyst, attorney worth their salt is in agreement on this issue. This is just not up for debate.

DEAN: All right. There we have it. Elliot Williams, thank you so much. Boris?

SANCHEZ: President Trump ratcheting up pressure on Harvard today, threatening Harvard's tax-exempt status, suggesting the university be taxed as a, "political entity." This post follows the administration's decision on Monday to freeze more than two billion dollars in federal funding after the nation's oldest university rejected demands to change its policies.

The White House wants the Ivy League school to make significant changes, including ending its DEI programs, banning masks at campus protests and giving full cooperation to immigration officials. CNN's Kara Scannell joins us now live with the latest.

So, Kara, where do things stand?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, that $2 billion in federal grants are frozen and 60 million dollars in federal contracts are frozen. That was - that's what's currently on the table right now at Harvard University. And as you noted, Trump issued a statement on social media today suggesting that this could escalate even further and looking for another pressure point to go after the university and that would be on its tax-exempt status.

But the way things stand right now is that that pocket of money is frozen. The administration has targeted about $9 billion in federal funding that goes toward Harvard. Now, we've reached out to Harvard to understand which of their programs are being impacted. We have not heard back, but some of their biggest grants come from the National Institutes of Health. Those include funding research into cancer, into infectious diseases and other areas.

So, as that is beginning to play out, there's also just the question of what other areas might the Trump administration put pressure on here.

[15:10:05]

And they've made clear in that - in the press conference today with the Press Secretary that they expect all universities to comply, what they say, with the federal law if they expect to get federal funding. And among the specific issues that they asked for Harvard, as you mentioned, includes shutting down the DEI policies and asking them to reform their hiring of faculty as well as their admissions practices. They also want Harvard to agree to the federal audit of those practices and also not admit any foreign students if they have, quote, "hostile views to the United States."

These are all things that Harvard is pushing back on saying that they are not going to agree to. But as it stays right now, whether this ends up in court or if there's further negotiation behind the scenes, it's yet to be seen, Boris.

SANCHEZ: And Kara, talk to us about other schools that the administration is targeting.

SCANNELL: Yes. So, it's not just Harvard University. And Columbia University was one of the initial ones that the administration, they froze $400 million in funding. Columbia then came out and said that they would make some changes, but it seems like some of this funding is still frozen. It's still in play in negotiations. Now, other universities have also had their funds targeted, some saying that they didn't even know about it until it was reported in the media, so they hadn't had any initial conversations with the administration. That includes Cornell University and Northwestern University.

The administration froze more than a billion dollars from Cornell and about $790 million from Northwestern. You know, they're also looking at a number of other universities. One thing we did see today was that Stanford University, which is - in itself under review, came out in favor and support of what Harvard's decision has been to fight back on this. But it's interesting, and we're waiting to see if other universities kind of step on the same grounds as Harvard and follow in their footsteps, or if more lead to make some more concessions to try to resolve this funding freeze. Boris?

SANCHEZ: Kara Scannell, thank you so much for that reporting.

We are following breaking news right now out of Texas. The Dallas Independent School District just tweeted that police are responding to a shooting incident at Wilmer-Hitchins High School. Officials say that safety protocols there have been implemented. They're asking everyone to stay away from the campus. The school district says it will soon release plans for families to reunite.

We still have not yet gotten word on any potential fatalities or injuries. We are waiting for an update from officials on that. We will bring you the very latest as we get it right here on CNN.

And still ahead, we're learning there's been little progress on a trade deal between U.S. and European Union negotiators. This just as Europe publishes a list of U.S. goods it's going to hit if those talks about tariffs aren't successful.

Plus, it's the busiest time of the year for the IRS, yet a staggering number of IRS employees are on track to take buyouts and plan to resign. We have the latest details.

And later, some incredible video of a hiker who's rescued after getting stuck on the side of a California cliff. That and much more, including an update on that reported shooting at a school in Texas when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:17:41]

SANCHEZ: Significant developments, or lack thereof, in tariff negotiations between the United States and Europe. We just learned the two sides made little progress in their first round of talks. This news comes shortly after the EU put out a list of more than 400 U.S. products they say they'll tariff if a deal does not happen by mid- July. On that list, toilet paper, makeup, tobacco and clothing as well.

DEAN: As for ongoing talks with other countries, here's what the White House just had to say about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We've had more than 15 deals, pieces of paper put on the table, proposals that are actively being considered and as we've said consistently, more than 75 countries have reached out. So, there's a lot of work to do. We very much understand that, but we do believe that we can announce some deals very soon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: Here with us now, John McNiff is the founder and CEO of Motum Capital Management, and Ross Gerber is the co-founder, president and CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management.

Good to see both of you here.

John, I first just want to start with you and get your reaction to what the press secretary had to say there that they expect to be announcing deals shortly and that a lot of these countries had reached out.

JOHN MCNIFF, FOUNDER & CEO, MOTUM CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: Well, one, that's obviously positive news. We want to see that in these developments. And, you know, markets will respond very well to that after last week's sell-off. So, any news we - positive news we get around tariffs being decreased is a positive for the U.S. consumer and U.S. businesses, so that is all positives that we want to see.

DEAN: Probably any certainty that can be had right now is what people are after.

MCNIFF: Yes, I mean, when you look at, like, economic conditions, uncertainty, we deal with it every day, but largest uncertainties within your (INAUDIBLE) you know, supply chains. All of the negative effects of the tariffs really affects consumer behavior. So, what happens is you kind of start this self-fulfilling prophecy.

So, if you're worried about your income, you're worried about your, you know, you stop traveling, you stop spending money, you're worrying about things like that. The same thing is happening with businesses, right? They're worried about the supply chain, they're worried about their access to parts, they're worrying about the consumer, so they stop investing in capital on long-term projects.

So, this spiral that begins with the concept of uncertainty spiking in the financial markets, you'd call that volatility, is a - has a negative effect to the tariffs and is something that I think we need to get ahead of because it can have long-term consequences.

[15:20:07]

And once the boat kind of shifts, right, it's really hard to kind of turn back. SANCHEZ: Ross, when it comes to these products that the EU is vowing retaliation against, they aren't really the biggest U.S. exports to the EU. I wonder what you make of that and what U.S. investors and businesses are really looking for out of these negotiations.

ROSS GERBER, PRESIDENT & CEO, GERBER KAWASAKI WEALTH AND INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT: Well, as was just mentioned, certainty is what we've lost and for pretty much most of the small business in America right now, this is an incredibly difficult time because you have a double whammy of not being sure what your costs are and also seeing less demand at the same time, and it's very hard to make any capital allocation decisions for businesses here with this kind of uncertainty.

Any tariff at all brings up the cost of living and the cost of goods for Americans. And the issue is how much or little tariffs are going to be between all the different countries. So, the uncertainty isn't going to go away for some time, but the consumer is already voting and they're voting by not spending money. We're seeing deals falling apart. We're seeing real estate deals fall apart, leasing, capital improvement. We're seeing consumers spending less.

You know, it's already happening. We're already at the cusp of a recession and it's very possible we could run into a recession. So ...

DEAN: Uh-oh.

GERBER: ... (INAUDIBLE) that's where we're headed. It's just sad, but just a self-created recession.

SANCHEZ: It seemed like there was a tariff briefly placed on your internet signal there. You went out and came back. We're fortunate that you're back with us.

John, I do want to ask about China's response to some of these moves by the Trump administration, specifically this Bloomberg report that Chinese authorities ordered its airlines not take any further Boeing deliveries. I wonder how significant that is.

MCNIFF: I mean, obviously that's very significant. Boeing is a big - one of the largest producers of aircraft in the world. It's a big economic engine for the U.S. And these are kind of these butterfly effects that are occurring once you start going down this road of tariffs. The tariffs are a very blunt tool, right?

I mean, we all know that, you know, they're a regressive tax and they're increasing costs for both on the consumer and on businesses. Then, we had reciprocal tariffs come in. So, that back-and-forth fighting has escalated prices. You're now going to start to see, which you also saw over the weekend with the restrictions from China on rare earth metals and minerals, that these are other steps that are actually more supportive for the Chinese economy than getting into a tariff war with us, but have a very negative effect on the U.S., right?

When you do a reciprocal move like that, you are now playing chess at a different part of the board because we need those rare earth metals for our manufacturers, for everything from cell phones to cars. You're going to have car earnings next week. It will be too early for this, but the outlook by the CEOs is going to be very interesting.

But - so you're seeing these kind of knock-on effects of the - of what the tariffs are causing other countries to do. And obviously they're not positive for us as a consumer.

DEAN: And Ross, the Chinese president is now on a tour of Southeast Asia. Right now, we know he's also met with the Spanish prime minister last week. As an investor in American companies, I'm curious what you think of just this dynamic we see playing out now. The fact that Xi is going around, meeting with U.S. allies, having these conversations amidst this backdrop.

GERBER: Well, I think that - you just said U.S. allies. Who is our allies anymore? Because I think we just burned our bridges with all of our major allies. So, I look at it the opposite. China is going on tour, signing deals left and right is their goal and working out agreements with the EU because the EU and China are two-thirds of the world and we're the other third of the world as far as major industrialized economies. So, we're not the majority of the world's industrialized economies and this is exactly why this strategy of blunt force tariffs and bullying other nations doesn't create the outcome that you want because the other nations don't want to be pushed around.

Now, if you look at Chinese history over any period of time and certainly the long-term, they're willing to deal with economic pain. They're fine being isolated from the West. They'll trade with other people and they've done this for thousands of years, a lot longer (INAUDIBLE) America has even been around.

So, you know, we're really - it's like we act like we're in this position of strength, but yet we're spending $2 trillion a year more than we make and we need to borrow that money from the same people that we're pissing off. So, we've created from a position of strength of negotiation into a position of almost desperation and weakness because if they don't get deals, they look real bad too and markets will go lower.

[15:25:07]

So, you know, Trump's going to have to deal with market force, desperation and weakness because if they don't get deals, they look real bad, too, and markets will go lower. So, Trump's going to have to deal with market forces that she doesn't have to deal with. And so, as - I think that we all can negotiate better deals with our partners, but there's a way to do things and this is just doesn't seem like an effective way.

SANCHEZ: Such a significant point about leverage that Beijing has in terms of the debt that they own from the United States. I wonder, Ross, quickly this vow from Trump and his administration to put tariffs on pharmaceutical products. I mean, there's no way that that isn't going to impact patients and folks who rely on critical medicines. GERBER: Right. And so, every way you do the math, the cost of living in the United States is about to go up and it could go up fairly substantially. And voters and consumers are going to see this and they're going to push back. With things like pharmaceuticals, you don't have a choice. And so you're just like jamming people that oftentimes can't even afford the pharmaceuticals they're paying for now and just raising prices.

It's really just the biggest tax increase on middle income and lower income Americans in history that I can think of in modern history. And why there isn't more pushback against this is crazy to me. And then, the second thing is I don't even think this is legal. And if you really analyze the way Trump is putting these tariffs on is he's using some obscure law and I don't think it's legal.

And the fact that Congress hasn't pushed back and doing what's best for its constituents. And this is political, it doesn't matter whether you're a Democrat or Republican. This is going to hurt you. And if you don't understand that, you're going to see it in the next month as prices are already going up and are going to keep going up.

And so, you know, I hope that people call their senators, reach out to their Congress people and express their dismay that this is the policies that 75 million people voted for. You know, I don't think they realize that. And now we're going into a tougher time for America and it's all self-created. We were in such a good position just three months ago and it's just so sad to see so much wealth destroyed. Almost 10 percent of American wealth has just been destroyed in the last two months, even just really two months.

DEAN: Yes, it is an incredible. All right. Ross Gerber and John McNiff, our thanks to both of you, we really appreciate it.

MCNIFF: Thanks for having me.

DEAN: Still to come, new CNN reporting about DOGE's efforts to access data at the IRS and how they crafted the agency's unprecedented data sharing agreement with immigration authorities.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)