Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Supreme Court Lets Trump End Deportation Protection For 500k Immigrants From Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela; Trump Accuses China Of Violating Trade Agreement With U.S.; Trump Lashes Out At Judges In Response To Tariff Ruling. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired May 30, 2025 - 11:00   ET

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

y

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:01:43]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Happening now, breaking news, tariff whiplash, Americans pulling back spending, and President Trump is now lashing out at China. We are following all the breaking news on the economy.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: We want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and indeed around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer with Pamela Brown and you're in The Situation Room.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is CNN Breaking News.

BLITZER: And we begin this hour with breaking news, a new ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.

BROWN: The justices will allow the Trump administration to end deportation protections for half a million immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst Joan Biskupic joins us now. What more do we know about this, Joan?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SENIOR SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Good to see you, Pamela and Wolf. This is the second time in this month that the Supreme Court has intervened in a case at an early stage and said that the Trump administration can start rolling back deportation protections for certain groups of migrants. As you said, this one involves Cuban, Haitian, Venezuelan, and Nicaraguan migrants who are here, nearly half a million people who had been granted a type of humanitarian patrol -- parole during the Biden administration. But the humanitarian protections here go all the way back to the 1950s.

But for these, this group of migrants, that has now been lifted. And the merits of the case will continue in lower courts, Pamela. But for now, it really gives the green light for the Trump administration to begin deporting people. And earlier this month, there were hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans who were at stake in a separate temporary protected status case who also lost at this initial stage. The Supreme Court's order was not signed. There was no explanation.

Only two justices broke off to dissent, Liberals Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. But certainly what the Trump administration has been getting, at least in these types of deportation cases, is a green light from the Supreme Court. As you know, an administration has broad powers over immigration. But it's the -- the legal issues go to how quickly they can roll back things, if there's been sufficient notice, whether they've followed proper procedures. And those questions will continue. But for now, it's definitely a win for the Trump administration. Pamela?

BROWN: Thanks, Joan.

BLITZER: All right, Joan, thank you very much for me as well.

Also happening right now, the former president of the United States, Joe Biden, is giving his first public remarks since his cancer diagnosis. He's speaking at what's being described as a Memorial Day service in Delaware. This comes two weeks after former President Biden was diagnosed with a very aggressive form of prostate cancer that spread to his bones. I want to listen in. Let's listen in.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: By the people and for the people. They, they are we, and we are still free. And now we must make sure that sacrifice has never been in vain. Let me close with this. The women and men we honor today were no longer with us. But you can still hear their echoes. Literally, can't you, if you lost anybody? You can hear the echoes, the echoes of their voices. They're asking, what will we do? We who are alive, we who remain. They're not asking us to risk our lives.

[11:05:20]

They're asking us to stay true to what America stands for. They're not asking us to do their jobs. They're asking us to do our job, to protect our nation in our time, now, to defend democracy, be part of something bigger than ourselves.

So today, let's renew our pledge to honor our heroes. I mean this sincerely. Renew our pledge to honor our heroes. Think of what they did. Think what they'd be doing if they are standing here today with us. Not only with our words, with our deeds. To care for their families. To support our veterans. With more, not less.

I get really angry when I hear about veterans are seeking too much. They're not enough. That's where I wrote the legislation relating to Gold Star families and the rest.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: All right, we're going to continue to monitor. It looks like he's wrapping up his speech there in Newcastle, Delaware is being described as a Memorial Day speech. Our correspondent Arlette Saenz has been listening into his public remarks. The first time he's been speaking publicly since his prostate cancer diagnosis a few weeks ago. Arlette, update our viewers. What else did you see and hear?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, President Joe -- former President Joe Biden is speaking for the first time since he received his cancer diagnosis just two weeks ago. So far in the speech, he has not mentioned that diagnosis. But this is also a very personal day for the Biden family. Today marks 10 years since the passing of their son, Beau Biden from brain cancer.

That is something that the former president acknowledged in his speech, saying that this is a hard day for their family. I'm told that they all attended mass together as they traditionally do on the anniversary of his passing. But his appearance today marks the first time that we are seeing him at an event since they announced that he has an aggressive form of prostate cancer that has spread to his bones.

So far, his office has not detailed whether he has started seeking treatment for that. That is something that the Biden family with their doctors were working to determine. But for the first time today, we are seeing the former president since the announcement of that diagnosis.

BLITZER: Yes. It looked like he was delivering a pretty powerful speech as well. Arlette Saenz, thank you very much for that update.

There's other breaking news we're following this hour as well. A new report on consumer spending shows Americans pulled back their spending in April amid a chaotic tariff rollout. And new consumer sentiment numbers show Americans aren't feeling encouraged by the President's trade negotiations.

President Trump's tariffs are now mired in a bunch of legal battles after an appeals court reinstated those measures, at least for now. I'm going to go live to our chief national affairs correspondent, Jeff Zeleny. He's over at the White House for us. Jeff, the President is also lashing out at China big time, accusing them of violating the trade agreement with the U.S. What is he saying?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, yes. This is President Trump's latest really reaction to China, but really provoking some language here and really stepping up the rhetoric against China. He had a lengthy post on a Truth Social. I'll read just a portion of it. President says this. The bad news is that China, perhaps not surprisingly to some, has totally violated its agreement with the U.S. So much for being Mr. Nice guy. Some context here. The President went on to say that a couple weeks ago he wanted to -- to essentially break the impasse with a China and negotiate some type of a temporary trade agreement.

He said he was doing that to benefit China. But Wolf, the bottom line here is the -- that 145 percent tariff threat that had gone into effect was also hurting the U.S., was also threatening the supply chain in the U.S. So there was, uh, a need for both sides to come to an agreement, and they did temporarily through a meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. But the U.S. administration, the Trump administration is saying that China has not lived up to that agreement.

Well, the trade representative, Jamieson Greer, said this earlier today on CNBC. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMIESON GREER, U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE: The Chinese are slow rolling their compliance, which is completely unacceptable and has to be addressed. We made a huge effort in Geneva to accommodate the Chinese. And listen, it always ends up being this way, whether it's United States or other Western countries have always sought to accommodate the Chinese. We've had open markets, etcetera. And time and time again, you know, we see the, you know, the Chinese come down and not -- not comply with their agreements. You know, slow roll compliance, you know, not open their economy like they should.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[11:10:05]

ZELENY: So this is just one example of how the President and the Trump administration has been lashing out at China, of course, over student visas as well. But this, of course, it hits directly at the heart of the economic agenda. And, Wolf, you mentioned those -- those court rulings. For now, at least, the tariffs are back on, but they also are hanging in the balance here, and that puts all of the economic agenda. The President's essentially the revenue to pay for a lot of his budget and tax spending bill also in question.

So there's no doubt, as summer begins here, tariffs and these legal rulings are hanging over this White House. Wolf?

BLITZER: Yes. A lots of questions need to be answered. All right. Jeff Zeleny at the White House for us. Jeff, thank you very much. Pamela?

BROWN: All right. I want to discuss now with White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. Hi, Stephen. Thank you so much for coming on the show. I first want to get to --

STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR POLICY: Good morning. Great to be here. Thank you.

BROWN: Great to have you here. Looking forward to our discussion. And want to start with the news of day. President Trump said that China is reneging on the deal with the U.S. He posted on Truth Social this morning that he wouldn't be Mr. Nice -- Nice guy any longer. So what is the White House going to do in response to what it says is a violation of this agreement between China and the U.S.

MILLER: Thank you. Well, the United States has a broad range of options to hold China accountable not only for violating this agreement, but for decades of predatory trade practices and aggressive economic attacks on the United States.

China for years has stolen our intellectual property, thefted our trademarks, engaged in large scale industrial espionage, product dumping, currency manipulation, illegal subsidies for their goods. Ever since they entered the World Trade Organization, that Clinton- Bush neoliberal project, China has systematically ripped apart America's industrial base and supply chains, forcing America over a time into a position of economic subservience.

President Trump alone, alone, has had the courage to stand up and say that we're not going to allow China to economically dominate the United States. We're not going to allow China to take from us the materials, the manufacturing capacity, the industrial capacity that we need to protect America and to keep America safe.

BROWN: So what are you going to do then? The White House says it's violating the agreement. What specifically will the White House do? Will it raise it back up to 145 percent? Is that on the table?

MILLER: We've already seen -- I mean, you've already seen, for example, the announcement from the secretary of state that we are going to stop the practice of allowing China can -- to conduct espionage through the student visa program. One of the cornerstones of China's industrial strategy, again, for decades, has been to use the student visa program to conduct espionage on America's industrial trade secrets and to pass information back to the Chinese Communist Party from our universities, our high tech research, and even our nation's most sensitive and classified projects and programs.

BROWN: Right. So --

MILLER: So by exerting this extra scrutiny on Chinese visas, that is going to deliver a significant setback to China's long term industrial plans while protecting the security of America's own engineering, scientific and medical research.

BROWN: Just to be clear. So you're saying the -- the revoking of those visas is part of the response to the violation of this agreement. It sounds like. Is there anything else on the table? Will the President raise those tariffs back up to what it was before, 145 percent? Is that on the table?

MILLER: Well, I'm not going to detail for you right now.

BROWN: OK.

MILLER: The entire hand of the President is willing to play. I would just put it this way. There are measures that have already been taken. There are measures that are being taken. There are measures that are being considered. It would be incredibly unwise for China to continue down this path and not seek instead the path of cooperation and simply honoring the terms of the deal they entered into in the United States.

But look, this is a pattern in practice. China for years has violated one agreement after another after another, beginning again with its entry into the World Trade Organization. There is not a trade lawyer, a trade expert or a foreign government in the entire world that believes that China has for a single day upheld its obligations under the World Trade Organization. Not one. And the whole world has put up with it.

The whole world has tolerated it. While at the same time, China has gone all throughout the West, pinpointed specific industries that China needs for its own national security and targeted those for destruction to make the West's supply chains dependent on China. This was an economic, industrial and military strategy from China.

And they've been using these massive trade deficits they run with the United States to finance their own military expansion.

[11:15:02]

BROWN: All right.

MILLER: This is a fundamental core issue of national security. And again, President Trump alone has had the courage to take this issue on.

BROWN: We have other topics, but I wanted to make sure you -- you said what you wanted to say. And I hope that you, you know, got your response out there on China. I want to go to what is a big win today for the administration from the Supreme Court. I mean, it handed you all a win on ending deportation protections for a certain group of migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela.

So -- so you have these wins. I think it was the second one on this particular issue just in the last few weeks. Yet, even just yesterday, we saw whenever a judge rules against this administration, you say they're going rogue. Do you think a judge should just rubber stamp what your White House does? If not, what checks and balances do you think should be in place for this White House?

MILLER: The -- it's not the job of a district court judge to perform an individual green light or red light on every single policy that the President takes as the head of the executive branch. Just think about the premise baked into your question. Respectfully, Pam, you're saying that when the American people elect a president of the United States of America --

BROWN: I'm not saying that.

MILLER: The -- the -- the -- well, it's the implication who is the sole head of the executive branch.

BROWN: No. It's not. I just said --

MILLER: Let me finish. Let me finish. I -- I will answer the question happily. But look, when you have these kinds of lazy assumptions built into questions, it makes it hard to have a constructive.

BROWN: What is a lazy assumptions? I said you all had to win.

MILLER: You -- you said no. You said -- you said is it my expectation?

BROWN: I'm speaking --

MILLER: You said -- you said is it my expectation? It's not just you. It's the whole media. In other words --

BROWN: I know you --

MILLER: -- when you hear a sentence like -- BROWN: It is a completely fair question.

MILLER: No, no, no.

BROWN: You say --

MILLER: No, no, no. And I would gladly answer it.

BROWN: Go ahead.

MILLER: When you say, do we think district court judges should rubber stamp each action? There is a premise that is built into that that is absurd. The President is the sole head of the executive branch. He's the only officer in the entire government that's elected by the entire American people. Democracy cannot function. In fact, democracy does not exist at all.

If each action the President takes foreign policy, diplomatic, military, national security has to be individually approved by 700 district court judges. That's democracy. So there's 15 communist crazy judges on the court that each of them as a team working together can block and freeze each and every executive action.

Joe Biden was allowed by that same court system.

BROWN: Some of them are Trump judges though. Are they -- why did Trump put these crazy communist judges as you call them on the bench?

MILLER: You heard -- you heard -- you heard President Trump himself say that the Federalist Society and Leonard Leo has created a broken system for judicial vetting. And God knows this time around --

BROWN: He did say that.

MILLER: -- we are not going to using --

BROWN: So does that mean, he doesn't support picking Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court.

MILLER: What it means is simply this and nothing more. We're not going to be using the Federalist Society to make judicial nominations at all going forward.

But let me tell you about these rogue judges. This is the most litigated issue over the last 10 years, over the last 10 years, whether or not to deport the foreigners who invaded our country illegally. That is the most litigated issue.

You want a democracy in this country when Americans vote, when they cry out and they beg for a president to come and save them from this invasion and some district court judge in San Francisco or Manhattan or Los Angeles tries to shut it down and shield these foreigners from deportation, while the course did nothing to stop Joe Biden from -- and his administration and his officers, the Mayorkas from overseeing this invasion. And of course, we celebrate the fact that the Supreme Court stepped in. We celebrate -- BROWN: -- what -- what the Trump administration, the previous one with Biden. But just -- I just want to follow --

MILLER: Nobody stopped Joe Biden from flooding this country with foreign invaders. And I will say to you --

BROWN: OK. So -- so let me follow up with that.

MILLER: And we celebrate the fact that 500,000 of those can now be deported because the Supreme Court justly stepped in and stopped these crazy lower court injunctions.

Congress has reserved to the President by law --

BROWN: Let -- let me just follow up.

MILLER: -- the authority to conduct immigration enforcement.

BROWN: And the argument you're making is certainly shared by many Americans. The Supreme Court right now is looking at whether judges can issue a nationwide injunction. That issue in particular is certainly valid to be discussed. But there are several lower court judges that have raised the idea that this White House isn't following its court order. Is this administration committed to following the court rulings and the legal process?

MILLER: We are committed to following and obeying the laws of the United States. And the President has complied with all court orders. Am I going to sit here today and say, for example, that if a district court judge ordered us to say, take 1,000 troops from Iraq and move them to Afghanistan, that we would just do that?

If a district court judge ordered us, for example, to reveal the secret location of a CIA base overseas to the entire world, and all the CIA officers in that base would be murdered and killed. Am I going to sit here today and engage in radical hypotheticals? This administration has religiously complied with even the most unlawful court orders. But it completely upends the constitutional system. To have a single judge in Boston assert the same powers of the President of the United States is such an offense to democracy.

[11:20:21]

And on this network, we heard the word democracy, democracy, democracy, for God knows how many years during the Biden administration, when they were trying to throw President Trump in jail, claiming somehow that was what democracy required, when in fact, the Democrat Party has been waging war against democracy, they should be renamed the Communist Party, and district court judges that are trying to keep millions of illegal aliens here to steal our jobs, to steal our livelihoods, to steal our benefits.

BROWN: Let's keep on track here. Let's keep on track.

MILLER: There's nothing more on track than talking about the fact that the constitutional crisis of our time, our district court judges keeping illegal aliens on our soil who have no right to be here.

BROWN: Stephen, this is my show. I want to hear what you have to say. I've been respectful and given you the opportunity. But I also need to jump in because time is of the essence. And I want to ask you about our CNN reporting that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem posted a stunning allegation saying that an undocumented migrant sent a letter threatening to kill the President promising to self deport after the assassination. CNN reporting shows that investigators believe the migrant was -- was set up. It was a victim of a setup. What is the administration going to do now? And this is an undocumented immigrant, I do want to note that. But this was someone who came forward was a victim of a crime. And now law enforcement believes he was set up. Go ahead.

MILLER: I want to clarify what you mean. So we're talking about the same thing. Are you saying this -- this immigrant was here illegally?

BROWN: Yes, but I am. And that's why I said that I clarified that.

MILLER: Well, if you said -- you said -- you said undocumented. And I wasn't clear what that means. I'm assuming I have a fake I.D. I'm a few - assuming they have fake social security number. I'm assuming they have passport in their home country.

BROWN: But I want -- I want this to be and call me naive, a good faith discussion about what's happening right now.

MILLER: Right. When -- when we use language that's designed to obscure the truth. That's not good faith.

BROWN: All right. Does this risk --

MILLER: Illegal alien is illegal alien. They're not undocumented migrant.

BROWN: OK. That's fine. That's another discussion for another day.

MILLER: I don't know -- I don't know the -- I don't know the details of the assassination threat.

BROWN: OK.

MILLER: All I -- all I can say based on what you're telling me is there's an illegal alien in our country who's making menacing threats regardless of the facts or circumstances we don't want them here. We're going to get to the bottom of it and I would gladly come back on.

BROWN: They were set up. They were set up just to be clear. But quickly, where is the White House --

MILLER: You're saying the illegal alien was treated unfairly? Yes, I'm sure the illegal alien was treated very unfairly.

BROWN: OK. Where -- where is the White House on -- on revoking habeas corpus? Because you said a couple weeks ago you were looking at suspending that. Where does that stand right now?

MILLER: Well, as you know what -- what I said is that under the Constitution, the government has the authority to suspend habeas in a time or circumstance of invasion.

Now, what we're talking about in this context is solely with respect to a subset of illegal aliens who are already subject to deportation and expulsion under the laws of the United States.

BROWN: So what are you going to do? Will the White House suspend the habeas corpus for them?

MILLER: But, but it is our hope and expectation that the court system and in particular the Supreme Court will end the practice of district court judges unlawfully interfering in the immigration enforcement of the United States. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, it's a very important point, Congress stripped the district courts of jurisdiction in matters of immigration.

So each and every time a district court, in other words, they created Article 2 immigration courts in the executive branch and stripped Article 3 courts of jurisdiction. So every -- every time a district court is setting national immigration policy, that district court judge is violating the law.

BROWN: That's not true. You're talking about a law that's specific to temporary protected status.

MILLER: No, no, no, no, no, no, no. The -- the -- no, no, no. The -- the -- are you familiar -- are you familiar -- well, unfortunately, it is true. Are you familiar with the difference between Article 2 immigration courts and Article 3 judicial courts?

BROWN: Absolutely, I am. But what I'm saying is --

MILLER: Why do you think -- why do you think Congress -- hold on a second.

BROWN: -- launch over all immigration and a judge can't step in and do anything. I mean, that -- there is no --

MILLER: A district court judge has no -- a district court judge has no authority in this space whatsoever. Not even a little bit. Not even a small amount, let alone --

BROWN: That is just not true.

MILLER: So why -- just answer me this. Why did Congress create Article 2 immigration courts? Because they didn't want Article 3 courts and in fact prohibited Article 3 courts from adjudicating individual cases.

BROWN: OK.

MILLER: Is it -- is it really your belief? As if it is that's breathtaking to me that when we're deporting an illegal alien, we have to get permission from an Article 3 district court judge -- BROWN: OK. It's not my belief --

MILLER: -- like a trial judge. That your view?

ADRIANA DIAZ: -- it's how the -- it's -- it's how law works and the Constitution.

MILLER: No, the law says -- the law says explicitly that individual immigration cases fall underneath the Attorney General of the United States under Article 2.

BROWN: OK.

MILLER: And the Article 3 courts have been stripped of jurisdiction wholly in this area.

BROWN: There is a law --

MILLER: -- putting aside even the issue of nationwide injunction.

BROWN: -- that says it's not subjected to judicial rule. But that --

MILLER: That's just one of --

BROWN: -- does not apply to all immigration issues. It's one -- one law from Congress --

[11:25:04]

MILLER: Well, first of all, I'm glad that you're -- I'm glad that you're.

BROWN: Hold on. Elon, I mean --

MILLER: -- conceding that TPS rulings are awful.

BROWN: Stephen --

MILLER: But the entire structure of --

BROWN: Stephen, well, the Supreme Court weighed in on that. I am -- I am giving -- I am saying, yes, the Supreme Court said the Trump administration was right on that issue --

MILLER: One of many examples.

BROWN: -- twice in the last few weeks.

MILLER: We are always right. Thank you.

BROWN: But let me ask you, OK, well, not every judge agrees with that, but let me go to Elon Musk. Trump is hosting him in the Oval Office in Washington, D.C. office this afternoon as his time as a special government employee, we seen DOGE comes to a close.

"The New York Times" has new reporting that Musk's alleged drug use was more serious than previously known. I do want to note your wife is going to work with Elon Musk, but I want to give the White House a chance to respond to this. Did you have any concerns about it?

MILLER: I don't have any concerns, but also I believe there's a press conference today with Elon Musk, so everyone will be having an opportunity to ask these questions themselves.

All I can say is that DOGE has done an extraordinary job rooting out systemic waste, graft, grift and corruption from the federal government, and you're going to hear from the President today his thanks to Elon Musk for leading that effort to save taxpayers billions of dollars.

BROWN: All right. Was there any drug testing or any requests for him to drug test when he was in the White House, given the fact that he was also a contractor with the government?

MILLER: Fortunately -- fortunately for you and all the friends at CNN, you'll have the opportunity to ask Elon all the questions you want today yourself. In the meantime, the drugs I'm concerned about are the drugs that are coming across the border from the criminal cartels that are killing hundreds of thousands of Americans. And we're going to save hundreds of thousands of lives if these district courts would just get the hell out of the way, stop destroying our Constitution, stop taking authority they don't have and allow the President to do the job that not only he was elected to do, but the constitutional laws of the United States vest him exclusively to do.

BROWN: Stephen Miller, thank you so much.

MILLER: Those are the drugs I'm worried about.

BROWN: All right. Thank you so much.

MILLER: Thank you.

BROWN: Appreciate it.

MILLER: My pleasure.

BROWN: More when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)