Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Harvard Pushes Back Against Trump Administration; Trump Issues More Controversial Pardons; Federal Court Blocks Trump Tariffs. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired May 29, 2025 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:00]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: I'm Wolf Blitzer with Pamela Brown. And you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

We begin this hour with renewed uncertainty about the economy. Most of President Trump's tariffs are now paused, a federal court writing the measures -- quote -- "exceed any authority granted to the president."

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: But the Trump administration is digging in, immediately appealing that ruling and slamming -- quote -- "unelected judges."

So let's go live now to CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes.

Kristen, the tariffs are a key piece of Trump's agenda. How is his administration responding right now?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Pamela, last night, I talked to a number of administration officials who were annoyed. They were angry. They didn't know what this meant.

But, today, there's a lot more confidence. They have had meetings with lawyers. They have talked through this. And they do believe that there is likelihood that this can get appealed. There is also a likelihood that this could go all the way up to the Supreme Court.

So let's take a little bit of a break here to break down what exactly happened. This was a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel with the U.S. Court of International Trade.

What they ruled was this, pausing the tariffs because they say Trump lacked authority to impose tariffs even after declaring a national emergency. We also just heard from the National Economic Council director. He said that they are confident in the appeal and there are other ways to go around this should this be upheld.

But let's talk about exactly what does this mean, because it's a pause on some tariffs, but also some tariffs are not affected at all. So, on the paused tariffs, there's 10 percent on universal tariffs on most goods coming into the U.S. That is paused, 30 percent tariffs on China, 25 percent tariffs on some goods from Mexico and Canada. This also would mean, if this goes into effect, that the government

will have to pay back duties that they have already gotten from those tariffs. But we're not there yet. Now, what is still in place? That is 25 percent tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, as well as 25 percent tariffs on imported vehicles and vehicle parts.

We cannot stress enough, the tariffs, the trade deals, all of this is a huge, core part of Donald Trump's agenda right now. They are going to fight this tooth and nail. And, right now, they are feeling optimistic about their chances.

BROWN: All right, Kristen Holmes, thanks so much -- Wolf.

BLITZER: And China, Pamela, is also now responding to this pause on most of President Trump's tariffs.

Let's go live right now to CNN correspondent Marc Stewart, who's in Beijing for us.

Marc, what is China saying?

MARC STEWART, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Wolf. Good morning.

What is so interesting as we look at the Chinese response is the consistency in its messaging. Late today here in Beijing, we heard from a Chinese government official who said that there are no winners in a trade or tariff war and that protectionism is harmful and it goes against free will.

What is so interesting to me, it's the exact same phrasing, the exact same verbiage as we heard at the beginning of this trade dispute now more than eight weeks ago or so. So there is this bigger question about, how will China proceed forward? Both nations are -- have agreed to have this cooling-off period, this truce to perhaps have bigger discussions about a broader trade deal.

What does this mean? Because, for the United States, these tariffs were in many ways leverage against China. Yet China also has methods to fight back besides retaliatory tariffs. We know China has a very large arsenal of rare earth minerals, which are so important for the United States when it comes to chip development and for electronics.

So the road map for the future at this point for a bigger development is very much up in the air. At one point today, I was reading some remarks from some analysts from Deutsche Bank. It's the big bank in Germany. Its analysts wanted to hear from President Trump himself to get a better indication of what the administration is thinking, in addition to some of those remarks that Kristen mentioned.

Those remarks are going to be critical from the president himself, not only for economists, but also, Wolf, it's safe to say, for diplomats and government leaders here in Beijing.

BLITZER: Marc Stewart reporting from Beijing.

Thank you very much, Marc.

BROWN: All right, a new round of controversial clemency actions by President Trump is raising eyebrows. And those include a slew of new pardons and sentence commutations for individuals charged with everything from bank fraud to federal gun crimes.

Among the names headlining that list, reality TV couple Todd and Julie Chrisley, former New York Congressman Michael Grimm, rapper NBA YoungBoy, and even notorious Chicago gang leader Larry Hoover. And it appears that the president may not be done yet.

And joining us now to break this all down CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson.

Hi, Joey.

So, who stands out to you the most from this latest list of pardons and commutations?

(LAUGHTER)

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Oh, boy, that's a tough question, Pamela. I think there is something for everyone as it relates to all of them and whether or not we're seeing just a -- just really a new type of approach with respect to how government operates.

[11:05:10]

You know, you have a system and a system -- let's start with the Chrisleys. You have a system of trial, and you have this whole process that's predicated on a grand jury and 12 -- 23 people. A majority vote out an indictment. You have motions by attorneys like me against prosecutors for suppressing evidence, what the jury sees, what it doesn't see. You have a trial.

And, if we're talking about the Chrisleys, you have a situation where there's $36 million worth of fraud. There's tax evasion, bank fraud, fraudulent documents, et cetera. You have conviction on 10 counts, and then there's nothing to see here.

And so, I mean, you could go through all of them and just say, what are we doing? But the president does have unfettered discretion with respect to the Constitution Pamela, Article II. He can issue pardons, which is the essentially wiping away of a conviction. The conviction stands, of course, but it is a level, a measure of forgiveness.

We are just in different times right now, to be clear.

BROWN: We certainly are.

And Larry Hoover, for his part, he's the co-founder of Chicago's Gangster Disciples street gang. He had six federal licenses commuted, but he is still facing up to 200 years in Illinois state prison. And so you have to ask the question, like, what was the point of a commutation if he still has those state charges?

JACKSON: Yes, I think that is a good point. And I think this is an important time to talk about this.

What happens is, is that a presidential part and certainly wipes away the federal conviction, but it does nothing with regard to a parallel conviction. And so, when you have a person like Mr. Hoover, who has apparently done many things in terms of organized crime in his life, for which he's been convicted and held accountable in both federal and state court, their federal case goes away, but the state conviction stands.

And so he won't go anytime soon. A president has no authority to reach within a sovereign state and otherwise forgive that sentence. And so, whenever you look at a presidential part, you have to look and see whether there was a parallel state prosecution.

Last point, Pamela, and that's another reason why I think the federal government certainly has a role in terms of prosecuting, but the state has a role too. And, oftentimes, we see that. We have seen it recently, especially with cases involving police misconduct.

BROWN: I want to ask you about the pardon attorney here. The new pardon attorney is Ed Martin. He was previously the president's pick to be the U.S. attorney of Washington, D.C., controversial figure.

I want to highlight something that he posted to X this week from his personal account. He said -- quote -- "No MAGA left behind."

What does that tell you about the politics of this process?

JACKSON: It says exactly that. I mean, certainly, it seems to represent that, if you're in the right political party, that if you support the right people, that if you say the right things, if you support the right policies, and that if you're supportive of the president's agenda, then you would be first in line for a pardon.

That's not the way it's supposed to work. I mean, clearly, again, we know, we understand that you could criticize various presidents' pardons, but pardons should be looked at in a system that is uneven and unbalanced, a system that certainly is imperfect, as a practitioner in it, a legal system, a justice system.

But I think pardons are meant to really effect justice and to redress civil wrongs, criminal wrongs, not for doling out if I like you, if you support me, if you're with me on immigration. That's problematic. And it puts us, Pamela, in the Twilight Zone.

BROWN: All right, Joey Jackson, thank you.

And happening now: Harvard University is facing off with President Trump in court over the White House's ban on international students. And all of this is happening as Harvard holds its commencement.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CHEERING)

(END VIDEO CLIP) BROWN: As you see, the university president received a standing ovation after welcoming graduates from around the world, saying -- quote -- "just as it should be."

BLITZER: And he got a very, very strong round of applause.

BROWN: Yes.

BLITZER: CNN's Danny Freeman is joining us now from Harvard's campus, where commencement is clearly under way. And CNN's chief legal affairs correspondent, Paula Reid, is also standing by.

Paula, let me go to you first.

You have news out of the hearing. What are you learning?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Wolf, this high-stakes hearing in Boston this morning has just wrapped.

And, there, a federal judge made it clear that she will continue to block the Trump administration from ending Harvard's student visa program. So that ends their ability to host international students, because, if you are an international student, you can only be enrolled in the U.S. in a school that has a valid student visa program.

Now, she is leaving in place a temporary restraining order against this policy. And she's asking the two sides, both the administration and the school, to hash out what a more permanent block on this would look like.

[11:10:03]

Now, the university has argued that this attempt by the administration, this is a violation of their free speech and other constitutional rights.

And, interestingly, late last night, the administration took sort of a procedural step that appeared designed to upend today's hearing, which was expected to be one of the most significant developments in this ongoing battle between Harvard and the administration.

They served the school with a notice that they intended to end this visa program. And that notice is a formal -- again, a procedural step. But it gave the school 30 days to respond. And this is the kind of thing that, in a court of law, can potentially delay today's proceedings. The Justice Department tried to press the issue, but the judge wasn't having it.

She said that she did not just want to leave this question open. She wants to maintain the status quo, which is a pause on this, but make it permanent. So now we're watching to see what, if anything, the two sides can agree on for a permanent block on this, while the larger constitutional questions are litigated over the next several months.

BLITZER: And let me go to Danny.

Danny, I know you're on the Harvard campus right now. How are students reacting to this legal battle?

DANNY FREEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, Wolf, I spoke to a student about this ongoing legal battle just yesterday.

And hearing Paula speak about how this is coming out minute by minute, I'm reflecting on something he told me yesterday, which is that a lot of students last week, during senior week, a lot of graduating seniors, they got news of this initial attempt to try and ban international students while they were in...

(SIRENS BLARING)

FREEMAN: Forgive the sirens here -- while they were all at a senior week activity day.

So all the seniors went in a room and their phones started going off because this new attempt from the Trump administration last week started to happen. And now it's interesting, I'm wondering, of the students who are behind me in Harvard Yard as commencement is occurring right now, if phones are starting to ding with news alerts after this latest update that Paula just described.

But, Wolf, let me just talk to you about what has been going on here on campus as that court case has been playing out about 50 miles the other direction east of here where we are at Harvard. It's been, interestingly, apolitical, I would say, but there's been quite a bit of a wink and a nod and folks are definitely aware of the intense pressure and this battle between the administration and Harvard.

The president, as you noted and Pamela noted earlier, when he got on stage, he got a rousing standing ovation and round of applause. And he's really been the face of the university as they have been battling the administration here. He also noted, he said members of the class of 2025 from down the street, across the country and around the world, around the world, he added, just as it should be.

That was his nod really to what's been going on and how international students are really in the crosshairs right now of the Trump administration.

But, Wolf, I want you to listen to a conversation that I had with a Jewish student here on campus. He's also a graduating senior, probably getting his diploma any moment right now. And he reflected on the administration really carrying out a lot of these attacks against Harvard in the name of combating antisemitism.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACOB MILLER, GRADUATING SENIOR AND FORMER HARVARD HILLEL PRESIDENT: It's incredibly disturbing. None of my Jewish peers have asked for this. It's not done to advance our interests. There is no way that any sort of antisemitism gets solved by deporting international students or by denying them visas.

There's no way that kind of Jewish life on campus is going to be improved by this. In fact, it's only going to be worsened. It's going to weaken Harvard. It's going to result in the loss of our friends.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: So I want to note, though, Wolf, for all of the cloud of this large battle looming over this entire community campus, make no mistake, a lot of happy families out here today and a lot of happy graduates in caps and gowns that are all over campus as commencement proceeds -- Wolf.

BLITZER: And congratulations to all those graduates receiving their degrees today.

Danny Freeman and Paula Reid, to both of you, thank you very, very much.

BROWN: Big congrats.

And still ahead: how President Trump's effort to cut down on international visas could have widespread impacts beyond the U.S.

BLITZER: And, later, we will talk with President Trump's one-time national security adviser, as the White House is now struggling big time to make good on some of Trump's biggest international promises.

Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:19:14]

BLITZER: A federal court sending President Donald Trump's economic agenda into limbo, issuing a ruling that blocks a majority of his sweeping global tariffs.

The Trump administration immediately appealed the decision, raising even more eyebrows and questions about what happens next for companies and consumers.

Joining us now, the former U.S. Ambassador and CNN senior political and global affairs commentator Rahm Emanuel.

Rahm, thanks so much for joining us.

RAHM EMANUEL, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Hey, Wolf.

BLITZER: What do you think? How big of a blow is this to the Trump administration?

EMANUEL: It's a significant setback, I mean, not one they were planning, but it doesn't mean you can't solve a problem here.

That is, if you want to create manufacturing jobs in the United States, tariffs are not the only road and they're only one tool in a toolbox. There's 500,000 manufacturing jobs today right now in the United States with help wanted signs on it. Train people for those jobs.

[11:20:05]

You would get more jobs and more manufacturing jobs that route than trying to impose a tariff that is constantly moving, the target's moving, it's on, it's off, it's moving, 10 percent, 20 percent, reciprocal, 150 percent.

We got 100 -- we got 500,000, a half-a million manufacturing jobs with nobody ready to fill them. Train people for those jobs right now on an emergency basis, and you're well -- you're a half-a-million jobs ahead.

Number two, also, I think all this attacks on universities and their research, development that are primary responsibility for helping the United States become an industrial advanced economy, stop playing with our future.

And I think those two things are much better, as this tariff cloud gets resolved by the courts, which I also think the courts will reject the president's justification, which is that there's a crisis or something like that level, because none of it meets the standard.

And if you look at the background of all the three judges, it's pretty clear he has a steep uphill climb here.

BLITZER: I want to quickly turn while I have you, Rahm, to another major story that's unfolding this morning...

EMANUEL: Sure.

BLITZER: ... the Trump administration saying it will aggressively revoke Chinese student visas here in the United States. What do you make of this move? And how might this impact the U.S. relationship with China?

EMANUEL: Well, this -- let me take one step back. This is a pattern where the president or the administration identifies a problem, and rather than with a scalpel deal with it, it makes -- its solution is far worse than the problem it's trying to address.

There is a serious problem where China uses people here in the United States -- there was a story the other day in "The Wall Street Journal" about this, where they basically, through intellectual property, stole the -- shut a company down and took all the technology of driverless vehicles.

There is a challenge here with university students taking our research, going back home. How do you address that is not what they're doing. So they're making the problem far more serious a problem and making it worse because of an impulsive act. There's a way to address this.

And I don't think it's just on Chinese students. You have Indian students here that surpass Chinese students. There's a way to make sure that the research they're working on, the advanced technology they're working on, all the advancements stay in the United States and we don't fund China's competition against the United States.

But the way they go about everything, they make a problem they have identified far worse because it's impulsive by the president, rather than strategic.

BLITZER: On some domestic political issues, I want to get to those as well while I have you, Rahm.

EMANUEL: Sure.

BLITZER: You call the Democratic Party's brand right now, in your words, toxic and weak and woke. Give me specifics. What are you referencing specifically?

EMANUEL: Well, I mean, the -- here's the thing, that the party in the last few years, I think, got caught in a whole set of cultural issues that not only were tangential to the core issues the American people cared about. It looked like what we cared about were those issues, rather than important issues, whether you use the term Latinx, whether you -- we have a crisis in our classrooms.

Our kids are at 30-years lows on reading and math. What are we worried about? Bathroom access, locker room access. They're not core. They're not core to the issue. And we look like the interest groups were driving us, rather than us driving what are the major issues.

And one of the things I know in politics after obviously working for two different presidents is, you got to be able to distinguish sound from fury. Just because people are loud doesn't mean they represent a lot of people. It just means they're loud. And we allowed a series of interest groups to look like they were dominating the party, to the exclusion of the American people.

And that's why I think it's weak, woke and toxic. And it's very clear not just -- and that impression is not just shared by Republicans. It's shared by independents and Democratic voters alike.

BLITZER: You and I go way back to Little Rock, Arkansas, when you were advising Bill Clinton on his presidential run, as you and I both remember. I went down there, and that's where we got to know each other.

I know right now, Rahm, you're trying to push...

EMANUEL: Is this a stroll down memory lane for you?

BLITZER: No, no, we're talking about politics right now.

(LAUGHTER)

BLITZER: And I know you're trying to push your Democratic Party right now back to the center. How should Democrats go about that?

EMANUEL: It's not so -- people put the ideological lines.

Like, look, Wolf, I'm the first mayor that created free community college if you got a -- earned a B average in high school, and also created universal pre-K. I don't consider left, right, center, progressive. Does it move us forward or backwards?

But, to me, you have to -- I think the core thing that Democrats have to remember, the American dream has become unaffordable, it's inaccessible, and that is just not acceptable. The idea that people can own multiple homes, and a young family can't get a starter home is just unacceptable. And that should be the crux of what we address.

[11:25:05]

Second is, on the issues of what I think are mainstream issues, if you look at successful presidents who got both elected and reelected, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, they anchored themselves culturally in the mainstream.

And that's where the American people are. The whole cultural issues of the last four or five years have actually signed line the Democratic Party and sidelined our core message of taking care of the American people and their economic interests.

And so, to me, understanding the concerns of the middle class is core to what we believe as Democrats. And an example on education, you can't believe in equity, which I believe with Democrats is a central tenant, and be complacent with 30-year lows in reading and math scores.

There's no road to equity with children failing in education and being totally capable and totally complimentary of it, or, rather, complacent of it.

BLITZER: Many Democrats, Rahm, as you well know, have called for a new generation of leaders to take the Democratic Party forward. And you said, and I'm quoting you now, "I'm not done with public service, and I'm hoping it is not done with me."

But you have been involved in the Democratic Party politics for more than 30 years, as I mentioned. So why are you potentially the right leader for the Democrats right now?

EMANUEL: Well, the question is, do you have the right ideas for the future and do you have the energy and determination and do you have not only the right ideas? Do you have the record of winning both legislatively and electorally?

Never lost an election, helped make Nancy Pelosi the speaker of the House, and, more importantly, when it came to taking on the NRA on assault weapon ban, President Clinton asked me to take that on. When it came on to taking on the insurance companies to make sure children, 10 million children, had health care, I got that call.

The same thing from President Obama on both health care, financial reform. And when I was mayor of the city of Chicago, not only first city to create free community college, first city to actually -- large city to sue the pharmaceutical industries back in 2014 over opiates. So, the question is not only -- is not only do you need, yes, fresh faces, but do you have the energy, determination and proven record of winning, both electorally and legislatively, for the right reasons?

BLITZER: It sounds to me, Rahm, like you're seriously thinking of running for the Democratic presidential nomination. Is that right?

EMANUEL: Well, Wolf, you keep ask -- every time we get on here, you ask this question. When I have something to say, I will say it.

My main concern is making sure that we address what I think is not important to me, but what's important to the American people, which is -- and there's an interesting thing here. The moment the American dream became unaffordable is exactly when our politics became unstable.

And if you want to make our political system more stable and more rock-solid, you would make the American dream for the American people accessible. And it hasn't been. And we can't accept that as a country or as a party.

BLITZER: We will continue this conversation many times down the road.

(LAUGHTER)

BLITZER: Rahm Emanuel, thanks so much for joining us.

EMANUEL: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: And we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)