Return to Transcripts main page
CNN News Central
Federal Court Blocks Most of Trump's Sweeping Tariffs; Trump Administration to Aggressively Revoke Chinese Student Visas; Soon, Stylist to Resume Testimony in Sean Combs Criminal Trial. Aired 7- 7:30a ET
Aired May 29, 2025 - 07:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[07:00:00]
KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: A major timeout on tariffs, markets already reacting with futures jumping after a court rules most of President Trump's tariffs, the centerpiece of his economic agenda, well, ruled that they were imposed illegally.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: 275,000 university students in the U.S. waking up to the news they could have their visas aggressively revoked. What does this mean for them and what does it mean for the entire university system here?
SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: A massive piece of a glacier breaks off the Swiss Alps, burying a village below in ice, rocks and mud. What happened to the hundreds of people in that village?
I'm Sara Sidner with John Berman and Kate Bolduan. This is CNN News Central.
BOLDUAN: This morning, a major blow to President Trump in his trade war against the world. A federal court is now blocking most of his sweeping tariffs on dozens of America's trading partners. The three judge-panel of a court that, let's be honest, most people have not really heard of, found his tariffs, quote, exceed any authority granted, declaring most of his tariffs were imposed illegally. The administration immediately filed plans to appeal the decision, setting up a showdown that could go all the way to the Supreme Court.
But this ruling in and of itself is significant, halting Trump's 30 percent tariffs on goods from China, the 25 20 5 percent on Canada and Mexico, and the 10 percent across the board universal tariffs that he slapped on most goods from so many other countries.
We're keeping an eye on how the markets are reacting to the ruling. As you can see, market futures, stock futures jumping this morning ahead of the opening bell.
Let's get over to CNN's Alayna Treene. She's at the White House to kick us off this morning. Alayna, how is the White House reacting? Have we heard anything from the president yet?
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Not directly from President Donald Trump himself, Kate, but we've already seen the White House immediately appeal this ruling. And we did get a couple of statements from the White House. I'll read for you what one of their spokespeople said. They said, quote, these deficits have created a national emergency that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind and weakened our defense industrial base, facts that the court did not dispute. It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency.
And then we also heard from one of the president's top advisers, Stephen Miller. He put it more bluntly, Kate, he put it this way. He said, quote, the judicial coup is out of control.
But, look, it's very clear that the president's trade war is hitting a major roadblock with this decision, really rolling back the majority of his tariffs. Now, what's interesting is that this three-judge panel, one of which, I should say, one of these judges, the president actually appointed him himself, they essentially said that he did not have the authority to impose these sweeping tariffs in the manner in which he did.
And, remember, the president claims that he could oppose these tariffs and kind of go around Congress to do so by declaring a national economic emergency, but, essentially, the U.S. Court of International Trade has now argued that he has not able to do that.
So, the tariffs, including those he announced on, quote/unquote, liberation day, as well as the tariffs he put on us, Mexico and Canada, all of those really facing this major roadblock here. I would note as well, though, that the tariffs on steel and auto parts are not part of this, given that the president had imposed those tariffs using a different type of law.
But, Kate, I think a key question, of course, now is what does this actually mean for his tariffs moving forward, and what does this mean for the trade deals that he's trying to currently, or his administration is currently trying to work out with a series of different countries, particularly if you take note that, you know, most of these trade deals have not even had an opportunity to be struck yet.
Now, we have heard from some financial experts and other economists who argued that they believe that perhaps these negotiations will be slowed down. The process of trying to find some of these trade deals could be slowed down by this news, as a lot of uncertainty over whether or not these will actually remain in effect.
[07:05:02]
I can tell you, Kate, from my conversations with Trump administration officials, they are eager and ready to have this fight reach potentially even at the Supreme Court. Kate?
BOLDUAN: That is surely one of where many think this is headed.
It's great to see, Alayna, thank you for kicking us off this morning. John? BERMAN: All right. With us now, CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig. Elie, the U.S. Court of International Trade with, an Obama-appointed judge, a Reagan-appointed judge, and a Trump-appointed judge, what is this court and how did they interpret the all-important International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So, John, this is a court we don't hear from or about all that often, but it is a fully valid, legitimate Article III court. It's really no different than any other federal court. It was authorized in the U.S. Constitution. It was created by Congress.
Now, the gist of the ruling that came out last night is this. Ordinarily, the tariff power belongs to Congress. However, Congress can pass laws giving some of that authority over to the executive branch, to the president. In 1977, Congress passed a law called the International Economic Emergency Act. Donald Trump invoked that act. He said, our trade deficits are overall international monetary standing. That is an economic emergency, and therefore, under this law, I'm imposing the tariffs.
And what the court found yesterday is that, no, this does not qualify as an economic emergency. Therefore, it was an improper use of that statute, and therefore, according to this Court of International Trade, those tariffs are illegal.
BERMAN: Yes. One interesting footnote, as The New York time points out, is that this 1977 law didn't even use the word, tariffs, anywhere within the law, though it does talk about national emergencies. So, this will be appealed and will almost definitely end up at the Supreme Court eventually, Elie. So, how will this court look at this case? What are some of the things it will weigh?
HONIG: Right. So, the key question really here is, does -- do the conditions that Donald Trump cited constitute an economic emergency, an international economic emergency? And the way this will go, John, is, first of all, the Trump administration does have the right to appeal up to the mid-level court of appeals. That is called the federal circuit. Again, we don't hear much from that, but it's no different than the Fourth Circuit or any of the other D.C. circuits that we hear about reasonably.
The other thing that I think is going to happen is the administration is going to ask that court of appeals, the federal circuit, to pause the ruling from yesterday basically to block the blocking of the tariffs. And we could know whether that takes place, really, it could be today where we get that ruling.
But, eventually, the way this is going to go is it will be appealed up to the federal circuit and then I think whoever loses the federal circuit is virtually certain to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to take a look at this.
BERMAN: And it will hinge on what in the Supreme Court, whether they think this is an emergency, that this fact of a trade deficit, which has existed on and off for 49 years and exists on January 20th, the day that he was inaugurated, you know, well before, so-called liberation day, just on that or on the scope of the law in general?
HONIG: Right. So, I think there's going to be two big questions if the Supreme Court decides to take this case. Of course, they don't have to take any case. I do think they are likely to take it.
The first question is going to be, is there even a role for the courts in reviewing this at all? One of the arguments the administration made is it's up to the president whether this is an international economic emergency, and it's not for the courts to second guess. The other -- the second question that will be asked is, well, if it is up to the courts, does this constitute an economic emergency or is this an overextension of that law?
BERMAN: Really great explanation. It's an important point, that first one, the court will decide whether court should be involved at all.
Elie Honig, great to see you, as always, thank you. Sara?
SIDNER: All right. Happening today, a judge is set to hear arguments for the first time in the case between Harvard and the Trump administration, as the State Department announces it will aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students.
And new this morning, more pardons from President Trump. Are his latest choices, all political allies?
And a car speeds off a cliff, crashes onto a roof, and this is not the first time this very thing has happened.
Those stories and more ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:10:00]
BOLDUAN: So, United States will aggressively revoke visas of Chinese students. That is the message, the warning, and the threat, really, now coming from the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, announcing that the Department of State will be targeting those, quote, with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.
This is expected to further rock the already shaky 90-day truce that China -- with China on tariffs with the Trump administration, and also further rock this blanket of uncertainty hanging over colleges and universities across the country, first and foremost, when it comes to Harvard.
For 15 years, China was the top source of international students studying in the United States. That is until India took the lead just last year. So, this could have a huge impact.
CNN's Jennifer Hansler has much more on this. She's tracking this announcement. And, Jen, what are you learning about what the secretary of state is saying here? JENNIFER HANSLER, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT REPORTER: Well, Kate, this surprise announcement from Secretary Rubio last night is a further escalation of tensions with Beijing, and it's also poised to be a further blow to higher education institutions here in the United States.
[07:15:05]
Now, this announcement was pretty sparse on details. It says that they will aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields. But the secretary of state does not define what those critical fields are or how they are going to establish a connection to the CCP given how ubiquitous it is in China. Will it just be that a family member is a member, that the student them self is a member? Those questions remain unanswered.
Now, there's also questions about how they are going to further revise their visa vetting process for those from China and Hong Kong. It is notable that the secretary of state said they would be working with the Department of Homeland Security on the visa revocations, which indicates that they're going to be aggressive about potentially not allowing these students to remain in the United States once their visas are revoked.
Now, this is just among a slew of actions that the administration has taken over the past several days targeting visas, especially those for international students. On Tuesday, the State Department ordered all of its embassies and consuls around the world to pause all new VISA appointments for student in exchange visa applicants. This pause is so they can work on an expanded social media vetting policy. They say that this policy guidance is going to be rolled out in the coming days, but it is likely to have an impact on the number of students who will be able to obtain those visas and come and study here in the United States.
That, in turn, of course, Kate is going to impact the universities here who rely on these students for enrollment numbers and tuition money.
I should also note that they escalated their feud with Harvard. I learned from senior administration officials last night that they are now reviewing the visas of all Harvard affiliated visa holders, not just students. Kate?
BOLDUAN: That is an important, important new development as well. Thank you so much and great reporting as always. Sara?
SIDNER: Still ahead, threats to leaked sex tapes, and new accusations of physical abuse. More disturbing testimony from someone who worked with Sean Combs and Cassie Ventura for nearly a decade.
Plus, Elon Musk is out leaving the Trump administration. We have new CNN reporting on the pressure the billionaire has been facing from investors as his companies pay a price for his politics.
Those stories, and more ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:20:00]
SIDNER: All right, disturbing testimony in the Sean Combs racketeering and sex trafficking trial, back on the stand, Combs's former stylist, Deonte Nash. Nash made several explosive claims Wednesday, including that he saw Combs assault Cassie Ventura multiple times. He also testified that he heard Combs threatened Ventura, including threats to release sex tapes of her and damage her music career. Nash also testified that Ventura told him she did not want to attend Combs' drug-fueled and so-called freak-offs. The prosecution says its next witness will be another one of Combs, former assistance who will testify under a pseudonym.
Here with me now, Defense and Trial Attorney Misty Marris. From this stylist, is this the first time that we've heard someone corroborate Ventura who said she didn't want to take part in this? Is this the first time we've heard someone say, yes, I heard her say she did not want to be a part of the freak-off?
MSITY MARRIS, DEFENSE AND TRIAL ATTORNEY: Yes, Sara. And this is going back to in real time what she was communicating to somebody who was not only her stylist, but was a very close friend for a long period of time. And, in fact, he testified that they're still friends.
But even more so than that corroboration, you also have Deonte Nash, the stylist, observing this physical abuse, but take it a step further. He hears these threats. He tries to help her get away, go to hotels to get away from Combs when he's violent or when he's seeking her out. And guess what she's met with, according to Nash, security guards coming to the hotel to bring her back, a time where they're riding in a car and the security guards cut them off and another altercation happens between Combs and Cassie.
So, this all speaks to that larger element of force, fraud and coercion that prosecutors need to establish. She's basically living under threats during this period of time that she's with Combs.
SIDNER: So, of all we've heard -- I think this is the 13th witness. Of all we've heard, this seems to be a significant point where they're starting to turn to try to show, hey, here's all the things to corroborate what Cassie Ventura said, but this helps us with our particular case, with racketeering and with sex trafficking, to some degree, because she said that she didn't want to do it and then she was sort of coerced into doing it.
All right, let's move on to the person who was going to be testifying after Nash finishes testimony today, someone named Mia. Now, why is this person under a pseudonym?
MARRIS: So, this person's under a pseudonym because they're anticipated they're going to testify about sexual abuse that they experienced at the hands of Combs. So, Mia is a very consequential witness from what we know right now. First, she's referenced in the opening statements by prosecutors, so that means they're foreshadowing her testimony.
She's a victim of sexual abuse. She was an assistant of Combs, so she's likely to testify about what is this criminal enterprise. It's called the method and means, which in layman's terms, how it works. She's also been referenced in others' testimonies, so she's probably a corroborating witness as well. So, her testimony is pretty key, and it's not only going to go through today, it's anticipated to go through tomorrow as well.
SIDNER: This trial just keeps giving so many disturbing details. We will see how the prosecution goes forward with this case today. Court starts in just a bit here.
Misty Marris, it's always a pleasure. Thank you so much.
MARRIS: Thank you, Sara.
SIDNER: John?
BERMAN: All right. Developing this morning, first, the court ruling, now a new verdict.
[07:25:00]
That's the verdict right now from the markets after a court blocked most of the president's sweeping tariffs.
Then a gang leader, a rapper, a politician, President Trump issues this new wave of pardons.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SIDNER: The new this morning, you can see what's happening after a major court decision has set futures higher this morning. Dow Futures rose after the U.S. Court of International Trade blocked President Trump from imposing almost all of the global tariffs, ruling that president overstepped his authority to impose sweeping tariffs that have raised the cost of imports for everyone.
[07:30:08]