Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Justices to Hear Arguments on Trump Plan to End Birthright Citizenship; Trump Arrives in Abu Dhabi for Final Leg of Mideast Trip; Soon, Combs' Defense Team Cross-Examines Cassie Ventura. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired May 15, 2025 - 08:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): -- view stretches out from the mountains to the sea.

[08:00:03]

We made it to the top. Such a good job, baby.

Up here in the bright California sun, we are closer to Hollywood Heaven, or at least the sign down below. There are signs of the way the west once was. Hollywood heritage runs deep here in Griffith Park home to a museum named after Gene Autry, Hollywood's singing cowboy.

Even my buddy, Apache, has movie credits to his name. Most of the horses on this ride do.

Rather a horse than a car any day.

You can even ride by or stop in and check out the place in Griffith Park where Walt Disney envisioned what would later be deemed the happiest place on Earth. Disney's Joy was tinkering inside this barn, his brain brimming with an idea for a childhood paradise that we all know as Disneyland.

And then we return to another kind of paradise, the Burbank and Glendale Rancho, as it's known.

That house just there to my right was Betty Davis' house. And there's a little green gate and she used to come out and ride her horse.

An unlikely sanctuary for horse people and horses alike, a slow-paced country gem in the land of vast freeways. May it survive the onslaught of human development and let the horses reign.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Cowboy Sidner. I'm glad she was wearing a helmet. That's all I can say. And our thanks to Sara for that.

You can watch an all new episode of My Happy Place with any and Tony Award-winning performer Billy Porter Sunday at 10:00 P.M. Eastern, Pacific. A new hour of CNN New Central starts now

This morning, a major case before the Supreme Court, can President Trump overturn the right to birthright citizenship and can lower courts stand in his way?

The president in the Middle East hinting at progress on a new nuclear deal with Iran.

And then breaking this morning, higher prices coming to your Walmart because of the president's tariffs, the new warning from the world's largest retailer.

Sara is out riding horses. I'm John Berman with Kate Bolduan. This is CNN News Central.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Happening today, a potential landmark case goes before the Supreme Court. At the center of it, the executive order that President Trump signed on his first day back in office aimed at ending birthright citizenship. It is the first major policy of his second term to really end up at the nation's highest court. It could have a huge impact on his power to carry out his larger agenda.

We're going to read for you once again, as we have, the 14th Amendment and what it has to say ratified back in 1868 when what it says about birthright citizenship, which is all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

But the case is not asking the justices to rule on whether the Trump order violates that amendment, lower courts have already said it does, instead they're considering whether a single federal judge or lower court has the power at all to block a president's policies nationwide.

Joining me right now as CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst Joan Biskupic for much more on this. And when arguments begin, Joan, what will you be listening for?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Good to see you, Kate. And, yes, this is a very big day at the Supreme Court holding a rare argument session in May when the court's nearly ready to finish up its entire term. But they schedule this hearing on the very first Trump policy that they're going to air in oral arguments just because of how compelling the issue is, not just of, you know, whether President Trump can lift birthright citizenship, but the power of federal judges to block any part of his agenda and block it not just for the district that a judge happens to be residing in, but through the whole country.

So, what I'll be listening for Kate is, you know, going to one of the points you just made, that this case isn't supposed to test the merits of what Donald Trump is trying to do to dissolve birthright citizenship that's been in place for more than a century-and-a-half, but they might send some signals about how they feel about that very core issue because when they look at the power of federal judges to block any kind of presidential policy, they necessarily have to consider a bit of the merits, whether something would be outright unconstitutional or not.

[08:05:09]

So, I think we're going to -- what I'm going to be listening for, Kate, is at least some signals about whether these justices think in this particular executive order signed on January 20th goes way too far. So, that would be one thing.

The second thing is, you know, just in terms of the power of a district court judge to impede a president's policy, that's been an ongoing debate during the Biden administration, during the first Trump administration. And the answer to that is going to affect the multitude of Donald Trump's policies. You know, his scaling back the federal workforce, his elimination of so many programs, sweeping curtailment of grants here and abroad.

So, what I'll be listening for is especially from Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, who tend to, you know, try to straddle a little bit more of the center of the court with Chief Justice John Roberts. Where is their sentiment on the power of these lower court judges and what they can do against a arguably unconstitutional policy. Kate?

BOLDUAN: Joan, great to see you. Thank you so much. John?

BERMAN: All right. With us now is Matt Platkin, the attorney general of New Jersey, and Andrea Campbell, the attorney general of Massachusetts. Both are Democrats who've joined forces with 20 other states to challenge President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship.

Attorney General Campbell, let me start with you. Is this a case about the reach of lower courts or is this a case about birthright citizenship? And when we're talking about birthright citizenship, do you think the court can make a ruling that doesn't deal with both?

ANDREA CAMPBELL, MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, I think it's actually we'll deal with both today. I mean, although it's their focus on whether or not there is the reach of the lower courts in this nationwide relief for everyone. The question may also still become whether or not the president has the power to dismantle the 14th Amendment with an executive order and frankly do away with birthright citizenship. So, I think I, along with my colleagues, will be listening for both.

BERMAN: Attorney General Platkin, do you think it's possible that the court could rule on the issue of nationwide injunctions from lower courts without deciding on birthright citizenship and what would that mean? What would that set off if they say, you know what, lower courts can't do this, I'm sending it back to you, and we're not weighing in on birthright?

MATTHEW PLATKIN, NEW JERSEY ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, I agree with General Campbell. I don't know how the court could consider the impact of narrowing this injunction, something that I think most Americans probably get confused by. It's a legalistic term. But here's the reality, if they were to do that -- I live in New Jersey. I represent 9.5 million people. Lots of mothers in South Jersey deliver babies in Philadelphia hospitals. Pennsylvania is not in our suit. Narrowing the injunction in this case would mean that those babies' citizenship status and the rights and privileges that attach to it are decided based on the hospital that their mother chose to go to, not based on the text of the 14th Amendment. And nobody since the Civil War has seriously argued that.

BERMAN: Yes. What would happen for a time, Attorney General Campbell, if the court did not rule on birthright citizenship, but did say lower courts can't make nationwide injunctions of what -- because ultimately this will get back to the Supreme Court birthright, citizenship will get back to the Supreme Court, but there could be a gap, there could be a delay of months if not a year. What would happen then?

CAMPBELL: Well, I agree with A.G. Platkin, that there's no way you can rule on sort of the technical procedural issue, which is whether or not the lower courts and several lower courts have sided with us to say the president does not have the power to overrule or dismantle the Constitution with an executive order. And that relief should be nationwide for the reasons A.G. Platkin and just mentioned.

But you can't touch that technical issue without at least, at a minimum, talking about the substance of what we are talking about, which is to make it clear and more relevant to people if babies are born here, birthright, citizenship says they're citizens. They have access to the rights and privileges of a citizen. But if we take that away, then we have babies born in this country with no attachment to any country, and the chaos and confusion that would cause in addition to the financial burden on our respective states.

So, we hope that the court will go into this substantive piece too.

BERMAN: Attorney General Platkin, so the case just laid out there by your colleague, The New York Times is a great article out this morning, which explains that was the accepted law really since the passage of the 14th Amendment. That is how courts have interpreted it. But there have been voices and the volume has been growing louder that say it's time to reinterpret that. Why isn't it time, in your mind, to reinterpret whether or not this should apply to the children who were born to people in the United States illegally?

[08:10:08]

PLATKIN: Well, I suppose if you go from no voices to a very low murmur, it's been growing louder. But it's not exactly the accepted view in the broader legal community at the 14th Amendment, the plain text of it put in place 157 years ago, again, that we settled this debate with the Civil War, that we said after the Civil War, we were never again going to debate whether a child born on U.S. soil is, in fact, an American citizen.

And for over a century, going back to the 1890s, the Supreme Court has agreed with the interpretation of the plain text of the 14th Amendment that we're putting forward. But this case is both about birthright citizenship, but it's also about whether the president is constrained by the Constitution or whether with the stroke of a sharpie he can rewrite one of the most consequential amendments in that document. And General Campbell, myself and our colleagues across the country have said very convincingly that you can't, and every court that has looked at this has agreed with us.

BERMAN: In the language of the 14th Amendment, Attorney General Campbell, includes the line subject to the jurisdiction thereof. And, again, this isn't before the court exactly today, but when it gets back to the court, what will be argued by some is that line that's subject to the jurisdiction thereof does not apply to people in the United States illegally. What would you say to that?

CAMPBELL: It's nonsense. And as A.G. Platkin and along with over a dozen Democratic A.G.s have said and argued even at the lower courts, is that that has been settled. That's subject to jurisdiction. If you were here, you were subject to our laws and jurisdiction. And now they're trying to rewrite the Constitution, rewrite the language for their benefit to try to push an immigration policy that is inhumane. This idea that a young baby, unborn babies, targeting them to not only take away their citizenship, but most importantly, somehow probably try to get rid of them from this country.

And so we're standing up not only from a moral place, but also because we believe in the rule of law and what it has been in this context for over 150 years.

BERMAN: All right Attorneys General Matt Platkin, Andrea Campbell, I know you'll be listening very closely to what these justices say, nodding yes, listening very closely to how they address these very important questions, because it will mean a lot about how you both move forward in the coming hours, days and weeks. Thank you.

President Trump landing moments ago in Abu Dhabi, but before he took off this morning, he had new comments on what he thinks the United States should do in regards to Gaza.

And this morning, attorneys for Sean Combs will have their first chance to cross-examine the star witness in the criminal case against him.

And breaking news, just moments ago, Walmart said it will raise prices on some items due to President Trump's tariffs. So, what items and when can you expect your prices to go up?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:15:00]

BOLDUAN: We're going to show you live pictures. This is in Abu Dhabi. President Trump just landed there, and as you can see, as we -- has become very typical. At each one of the stops, the president is getting greeted with a whole ceremony and a lot of pomp and circumstance in every stop, as we have seen. It's almost as if these nations leaders are trying to, you know, best each other on how big their celebration can be in greeting President Trump. He's landing there. This is his final stop, final day on his trip through the Middle East, and a lot has happened and there is a lot to discuss with it. He's wrapping up this four-day tour as we just saw the president landing there. And while the president though was in Qatar still, he spoke with business leaders, and also, as you see this, made a stop at the largest U.S. military base in the region, speaking to upwards of 10,000 U.S. troops.

The entire Doha visit had one giant offer of a 747 airplane hanging over it, the gift that President Trump says the Qatari Royal Family has offered him, something the Prime minister of Qatar tells CNN's Becky Anderson was an offer made out of love.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHEIKH MOHAMMED BIN ABDULRAHMAN AL THANI, QATARI PRIME MINISTER: We are able to help and to support the U.S. and we are not shying away from that. We are proud people. And even if there is something is coming out of Qatar for the U.S., it's coming out of love.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Joining us right now to talk about this and much more as it goes on with this trip is CNN Global Affairs Analyst Brett McGurk. He's a former White House coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa. It's good to see you again, Brett.

What do you make of, one, this plane gift and what it kind of also represents in terms of the mix that we've seen on this trip of some big foreign policy announcements and also concerns over conflicts of interest and security issues that have just kind of collided throughout?

BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I have to say, Kate, the plane story just makes no sense. I mean, I've flown on Air Force 1 countless times. It is one of the most secure assets in the U.S. government. I have received the most highly classified intelligence information on that plane. It is designed to be the command note in a nuclear war.

[08:20:01]

It has air refueling pods. And CNN has reported to retrofit a civilian plane or another plane to be Air Force 1 will take years and hundreds of billions of dollars. I think nobody probably knows.

So, I mean, they should really just drop the plane thing because, honestly, this has been a very successful week for the president on foreign policy. It started last weekend with the ceasefire in India and Pakistan, on Monday, the great news with the release of Edan Alexander, the hostage in Gaza, Gaza ceasefire talks are starting again now. They're ongoing now in Doha, I am told. They're actually making some real progress for the first time in months. The Israelis may have actually eliminated the militant leader of Hamas, Mohammed Sinwar. That would be a huge breakthrough. What the president did in Saudi Arabia, meeting with the president of Syria and announcing that we will lift sanctions on Syria to a standing ovation from the Arab leaders. That is a bold move. It's the right thing to do. And now you have the Iran talks ongoing because Iran is in the weakest position it's been in decades and there's a chance here for a good nuclear deal. So, overall, I think this is a really good trip in terms of foreign policy. Again, the plane thing, it makes no sense.

I'll just give one other example. You know, whenever you get anything as a U.S. government official, I'll just give an example, I was involved in last administration in helping to defend Israel against hundreds of Iranian ballistic missiles, and the Israeli chief of defense, who's now the chief of defense, gave us my office a shard of one of the interceptors that took down an Iranian missile. That had to go for inspections just to make sure it was secure, there were no devices. I didn't get it back for almost a month.

So, to retrofit a plane to be Air Force 1, I don't even think it could be done in Trump's first term. So, this is just a bad idea.

BOLDUAN: Wow. I mean, that is maybe the most perfect example of the security concerns, like times a billion that would be involved here. Other element of foreign policy and issue that is in the mix that the president is talking about, but it is really confusing is what's going on in Turkey. You've got Ukraine and Russia talks or non-talks happening. There's a lot of confusion around what's happening there. President Putin is not going to be taking part in talks despite calling for the talks himself. What do you think this is a signal of? Zelenskyy is on the ground, he's meeting with NATO members. What do you think is happening here?

MCGURK: Yes, this is really looking like Groundhog Day. You know, in complicated international diplomacy, you always have to ask yourself, is the motion of diplomacy actually resulting in movements? And here, I think what we're seeing is a lot of motion now over months. You know, on March 5th, there was a meeting in Saudi Arabia with Ukraine and Ukraine accepted a 30-day ceasefire. And Secretary of State Rubio said in a statement, a Russian reciprocity is now the key to peace. The last two months, there's been no Russian reciprocity. There's only been escalation of the war.

And then last weekend when European leaders visited Kyiv, there was another call for a 30-day ceasefire, and Putin did not say, yes. He said, well, let's have talks in Turkey, and Zelenskyy is calling his bluff, and the Russians are sending a very low level delegation.

Bottom line, Putin is showing no signs of wanting a ceasefire. That is a declared objective of the United States. And I think we're getting to the point here where you're going to have to impose some stiff sanctions against the Russians. President Trump has talked about the possibility of secondary sanctions on purchasers of Russian oil and gas. That really means India and China. That's difficult to do.

But I think we're getting to the point, if you just keep having this motion and no movement, you're going to have to impose some additional costs on Russia. The president doesn't seem to want to do that. But, you know, this is just now very clear. Putin's playing rope-a-dope. And to get a ceasefire, you're going to have to have another course.

One other thing in Turkey really amazing this week, the PKK, the separatist group, Kate, in Turkey fighting a civil war for 50 years is disbanding its arms. That is an incredible moment. It is a possibility for stability across that whole area of Iraq, Syria and the Kurdish regions, something I've worked on for years, including in the last Trump administration, had a lot of experience with him on this, very difficult experience. So, there's a lot going on here that's good. And I think if the administration can execute, they have a real chance. But on the Ukraine file there's just no -- it doesn't seem like we're getting anywhere.

BOLDUAN: Yes. The fact that the huge development with the PKK did not fall into the conversation that we've had just shows like how much is actually going on in terms of foreign policy just this week. Wow.

It's good to see you again, Brett. Thank you very much.

MCGURK: Thank you, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Of course, coming up for us, Cassie Ventura's heading back to court today to now face questions, cross-examination questions by the attorneys for her ex-boyfriend, Sean Diddy Combs.

[08:25:00]

How will they address what she told jurors about years of alleged abuse?

And the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, headed to court this morning after his arrest on a trespassing charge.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: All right. We are just moments away now from defense attorneys cross-examining the ex-girlfriend of Sean Combs, Cassie Ventura. She has spent two days giving graphic and emotional testimony about the abuse she says that Combs put her through. So, how will the defense now handle what they have to do?

Let's get right to CNN's Kara Scannell outside the courthouse. This is a big day, Kara.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It is, John. It's the first time that Combs' attorneys will begin their cross-examination of Cassie Ventura.

[08:30:03]

And their goal here is to try to undercut her credibility and advance their defense, which is that any of the sex acts that were --