Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

The Rise of Classical Christian Education; Trump Administration Adjusting Immigration Crackdown Measures?; Supreme Court Rules Trump Tariffs Illegal. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired February 20, 2026 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

JEAN CHAREST, FORMER PREMIER OF QUEBEC, CANADA: Because we want to be less dependent on the American economy, which, by the way, is true for everyone, whether you're Europe, Japan or South Korea, any other country in the world.

Everyone's looking to diversify.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Yes, good point.

Jean Charest, the former Canadian deputy prime minister, thanks so much for joining us. Appreciate it very much.

CHAREST: Thank you, Wolf.

BLITZER: And coming up next, CNN's Michael Smerconish weighs in on this truly historic decision from the U.S. Supreme Court. We have a lot to discuss when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: We are following breaking news this morning, the Supreme Court ruling that President Trump's sweeping tariffs are illegal.

With us now is CNN political commentator and host of "SMERCONISH," Michael Smerconish.

[11:35:01]

Good morning to you.

So, Michael, this is a huge decision and really a gut punch to the White House. Tariffs have been a cornerstone of Trump's second term. How does this change things, in your view?

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Pamela, can I just tell you that I was on radio air when the news broke. Obviously, I have got television monitors, but the sound is muted.

And out of the corner of my eye, I looked up and I saw on the screen that there was a 6-3 decision on tariffs. And I thought, wow, that's a surprise, because I anticipated that the White House would lose this case. And, of course, we all know there are six conservatives on the court.

BROWN: Yes.

SMERCONISH: And when I saw 6-3 decision, my mind automatically raced and I thought maybe the conservatives, they held together.

But, of course, that's not the case. It was the chief justice, John Roberts, and it's Amy Coney Barrett, and it's also Neil Gorsuch who decided with the more progressive members of the court that he did not have the emergency power that he thought that he had or that he asserted that he had under IEEPA.

Remember, the whole predicate here was that the president was saying that, because of emergencies pertaining to the border and the fentanyl crisis, that he could exercise this authority.

Chief John Roberts noting in this opinion, which I have not digested because it's so fresh, but noting that IEEPA, the law in question, doesn't even reference the word tariffs.

BROWN: Right.

And the big question right now for the White House is, what is it going to do with all of the tariff revenue that it raked in under this law that the Supreme Court says was used illegally? So you have the legal side of all of this and what's going to happen with the money. And then you have the political side of this.

And I was talking to Jeff Zeleny earlier, our colleague, and he said that actually for some Republicans running for the midterms, this is actually good for them, because now they don't have to go against Trump's tariffs in the way they would have had to otherwise and potentially could have an impact on the affordability issue that's so large in Americans' minds.

SMERCONISH: Right. I don't think that the court has resolved the issue of what exactly is going to happen to those monies collected.

And, look, the president has other tools in his toolbox. He went for the most expedient path in trying to use IEEPA. And even though the Constitution really says this is a congressional matter, they have allowed presidents to handle tariffs, there are other ways of going about this, maybe not to the extreme extent that he did.

But no one should watch this and think that it's the end of the administration trying to uptick the tariff policy. May I make one other observation about this? Because out of the same corner of my eye that I saw the 6-3 decision, I keep an eye on the markets.

And what I notice, Pam, is that the markets are not rattled by this. And before coming on with you a moment ago when I looked, the markets were up. That tells me there's no surprise. And the people who really read the tea leaves and understood the issue, they knew that he was probably going to lose this battle. BROWN: Yes. And, in fact, we have the Dow up right now almost 40.

It's interesting, Michael. I was talking David Sanger earlier, our national security contributor, and he made the point that, in this ruling, these Supreme Court justices, including two that Donald Trump appointed to the High Court, seemed to care more about separation of power and Article I of the Constitution giving Congress this authority, than some members of Congress.

SMERCONISH: I think this was an easy one for them. I really do, and I recognize that Kavanaugh and Thomas and Alito went in a different direction, so it was not obviously a unanimous opinion.

But it's pretty straightforward. He's got abilities pertaining to tariffs, but to use -- I keep referring to this IEEPA, the acronym, the way of trying to express it, but it seemed pretty straightforward that there just wasn't the emergency power for tariffs that he was seeking.

So my point is, if I'm Chief Justice John Roberts and there's a public perception that you're always siding with the president, the January 6 cases, the election-related cases, this is an easy way, I think, to send a message to the public that they maintain some independence.

BROWN: And the immunity case, of course.

All right, Michael Smerconish, thank you so much.

SMERCONISH: Thank you.

BROWN: Be sure to catch Michael's show, "SMERCONISH," every Saturday at 9:00 a.m. Eastern right here on CNN -- Wolf.

BLITZER: He really knows his stuff.

BROWN: He sure does, yes.

BLITZER: We always learn something from Michael Smerconish.

All right, Michael, thanks from me as well.

Meanwhile, there's new reporting coming into THE SITUATION ROOM. The Trump administration is pivoting to a more targeted approach with its immigration crackdown, and that means fewer scenes like the ones we all saw in Minnesota, with highly visible, militarized federal agents sweeping the streets.

Officials say the move does not mean their objective, though, is softening.

Joining us now, CNN correspondent Priscilla Alvarez. She's here with me in THE SITUATION ROOM.

I know you had a chance, Priscilla, to speak with Homeland Security officials. What are they telling you?

[11:40:03]

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So, they're telling me to anticipate a more typical approach to immigration enforcement that is done by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Remember that last year and over the course of the beginning of this year it was U.S. Border Patrol and ICE agents on the ground, and it was often those tactics used by U.S. Border Patrol in the interior with Gregory Bovino at the helm that drew a lot of intense scrutiny, particularly in Minneapolis.

And so what they're moving toward is that targeted enforcement or doubling down of that targeted enforcement, which means identifying who they're going after and then strategizing, and if and when they do that enforcement, if there are other people who are undocumented immigrants in the vicinity, they could also be swept up. They call that collaterals.

Now, this is essentially the playbook that Tom Homan came and put into place in Minnesota to try to correct and rectify the issues that had been happening on the ground there. He spoke a little bit about that this morning. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM HOMAN, WHITE HOUSE BORDER CZAR: I have made changes. I created a unified chain of command, so everybody is reporting up the one chain. I want to make sure it was targeted enforcement operation. I don't think that was happening in all instances.

But I think the most important thing I did, I talked to the mayor, I talked to the governor, I talked to the attorney general. We can't fix things talking in an echo chamber. We got to talk to the other side. And that's how we fix things. That's how we got the unprecedented cooperation. That's why the state of Minnesota thinks it's safer today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALVAREZ: So, this playbook, the Tom Homan playbook, one that he has had for many, many years, is the one that they are going to deploy more forcefully moving forward amid the waning public support about the way that they were doing immigration enforcement.

So this is a pivot from that Bovino-style approach. Of course, plans can always change. But what is clear also from the officials I have been speaking with is that this doesn't mean they're softening anything. They're just changing their approach, doubling down on an approach that they hope will continue to have public support, given what had happened in Minnesota.

I will also say that the White House did get back to me in a statement and said that they're -- the president's team is working together to implement his agenda and that they are always focused on prioritizing the worst of the worst. So we will see where this goes from here, but clearly they are trying

to usher again that support that had been waning in that because of what occurred in Minneapolis.

BLITZER: All right, Priscilla Alvarez, as usual, thank you very, very much.

BROWN: She also knows her stuff, as we say.

BLITZER: She certainly does.

BROWN: All right, up next here in THE SITUATION ROOM: the rise of Christian nationalism and classical Christian education, where religion isn't just taught; it's woven into every aspect of life.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:46:42]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: As long as I have breath, I commit to you that I and we should never allow any group, no matter how large or small, to silence us from speaking the capital-T truth. Christ is king. He died for our sins. We are forgiven.

(CHEERING)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: That was part of defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's speech to religious broadcasters last night. He also railed against what he called the godless left and praised Western Christian values.

Hegseth is the most high-profile member of a church network that doesn't shy away from Christian nationalist ambitions, and education is a key part of its mission. Today, more and more schools in that network are teaching kids everything from a biblical perspective.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Can people leave, by the way?

(voice-over): Caleb and E.J. Ripple are the headmaster and headmistress at a classical Christian school in Texas.

(on camera): Tell me why you think you're seeing this trend toward more parents sending their kids to classical Christian schools.

E.J. RIPPLE, HEADMISTRESS, KOINONIA CLASSICAL CHRISTIAN SCHOOL: I think people are starting to evaluate what they're doing a little bit more, like, to think more clearly. You only raise your kids once. And I think people are taking it seriously and making sure they're making the best decision. BROWN (voice-over): What started in the 1990s with a handful of

schools has become a fast-growing education sector. There are now nearly 500 schools across the country represented by the Association of Classical Christian Schools.

JULIE INGERSOLL, RELIGIOUS STUDIES PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA: In these kinds of Christian schools, the curriculum isn't a normal curriculum like might be in public school with a Bible class added. That's not how it works.

Everything is rooted in these kinds of Christian, biblically-oriented kinds of curriculum. The Bible applies to every area of life.

CALEB RIPPLE, HEADMASTER, KOINONIA CLASSICAL CHRISTIAN SCHOOL: What we are doing here is fundamentally different. What we are saying here is our mission as Christians is to make Christians, is to glorify God in our lives and through our lives and to multiply the image of God.

BROWN (on camera): So education is foundational for that?

C. RIPPLE: Foundational is an understatement. Education is a transfer of a way of life.

DAVID GOODWIN, PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF CLASSICAL CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS: The concept of classical education is really an enculturation. We want to enculturate Christian kids. That Christianity is the best basis historically for civilization.

BROWN (voice-over): And, in many classical Christian schools, that idea extends to the nation's origins, where students are taught that the United States was founded as a Christian nation.

But while many of the founders were Christian, the claim that they intended to establish a Christian nation is widely rejected by historians.

(on camera): When you look at the Constitution from the framers of this country, the only time religion is mentioned is to forbid religious tests for officeholders and religious liberty, right? How can you argue that the framers of this country meant for this to be a theocracy, essentially, with a Christian education for all?

GOODWIN: At the time our Constitution was written, it was an assumption that everyone in America was a Christian. So I don't find it surprising at all. In fact, I find it expected that the Constitution of the United States wouldn't have a bunch of direct statements about Jesus Christ in it because they all assumed.

BROWN (voice-over): Christianity is the framework in every lesson.

[11:50:00]

INGERSOLL: When students study science, it's rooted in a version of creationism that also dates to the 19th century. All of the way that they understand science is a theological approach to science. So, science doesn't become a way to discover things about the world by experimentation. It becomes a way of -- becomes a form of worship.

C. RIPPLE: When it comes to science, we teach that this is God's world. So we don't, like, hide from the theory of evolution, for example.

BROWN (on camera): Right, so you will teach them about evolution or Darwinism?

E.J. RIPPLE: We will teach it as a theory, yes.

C. RIPPLE: Yes, we teach it as, this is what some people believe, laughably.

BROWN: What about issues like gender roles? How do you tackle that in classical Christian schools?

GOODWIN: Well, we're definitely not third-wave feminists.

BROWN: So, for female students, what do you teach them about what they should do once they leave college?

GOODWIN: Well, we are clear that motherhood is a blessing and it's a calling and it's a priority. If you're a mom, your affections need to be first for your family and for your children and then for your career.

A lot of women in our communities have very high-placed jobs, but they're side hustles.

BROWN: But it's funny. They all call it side hustle. I noticed that. The women, they never say, it's my career or job. And that's by design.

GOODWIN: It is by design, because it's that order. It's showing that order that my first priority is my family.

BROWN: So what about the husband? The husband says he has a career or a job.

GOODWIN: Well, that's the calling of the husband is to provide.

BROWN: And do you teach that the husband has authority over the wife?

GOODWIN: That's biblical. So, yes, we would teach that. In the Christian economy, in the biblical economy, authority is a very big thing. I think that when you're talking about the husband having authority over the wife, it sounds bad in our context, but it has been the Christian way for 2,000 years, and it has worked quite well.

BROWN: So are these classical Christian schools a vehicle to create a more Christian world?

GOODWIN: Yes, that's our purpose, is Christian civilization.

BROWN: So, what do you hope the graduates will go out and do in America? GOODWIN: Live faithfully wherever they are.

BROWN: So, you would like to see them in positions of power, naturally?

GOODWIN: We're glad when they get there.

BROWN (voice-over): And classical Christian schools already have some powerful advocates, like Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

HEGSETH: First of all, thank you for being here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.

HEGSETH: Thank you for your leadership, for your mentorship.

BROWN: Goodwin and Hegseth co-authored a book about what they characterize as the decline of public schools.

GOODWIN: There's no such thing as secular education.

BROWN (on camera): So you don't believe there should be public school education?

GOODWIN: No. I don't believe in public education.

Do you think public school should even exist?

C. RIPPLE: No.

(LAUGHTER)

BROWN: Do you all -- do you agree?

E.J. RIPPLE: I would agree, yes.

BROWN: And it shapes what they do and don't look for in their own teachers.

C. RIPPLE: We believe that the accreditation kind of process, secular accreditation, kind of seeking approval to do this, we believe that that is actually one of the things that led to the degradation of education in America. So we don't actually value like some kind of a secular affirmation.

What we value as a school, the criteria for our teachers are, you have to be a Christian, of course, you have to love God, and you have to demonstrate that faithfulness through your life. And then you have to be passionate about what it is that you are going to teach.

BROWN: Do you think it's a sin to send your child to a public school?

C. RIPPLE: There would be examples that are inescapable when somebody's in the custody of the state. Some of these things are not even an option for parents, right? But if a parent is sending a kid to public school, to government school because it's free and it's too much work to try and homeschool or it'd be too much a change of our lifestyle to do a private school, yes, I would say that's a sin.

That's an abdication of responsibility.

BROWN (voice-over): In red states, Christianity is making its way into public education. Some Texas districts are adopting the Bluebonnet Learning curriculum, which weave Scripture and Christian themes into everyday lessons.

Oklahoma officials have pressed for Bibles in classrooms. And in other states, there are efforts to post the Ten Commandments in classrooms.

(on camera): Do you agree with anything that's happening in some of these Republican states, where they're putting Bibles in schools?

GOODWIN: Yes, I think they're trying to right the wrong. I think that most conservatives would say, we just assume to get rid of the whole public school.

[11:55:02]

BROWN: So are you happy with what's happening at the Department of Education being dismantled?

GOODWIN: Yes, I mean, moderately happy, because I think it was not that consequential of a department to begin with. But it's good.

BROWN: But this is -- for all intents and purposes, this is what you want to see.

GOODWIN: Yes.

BROWN: The dismantling of the Department of Education and ultimately getting rid of public schools.

GOODWIN: Yes. Yes.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: And, Wolf, we talked about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. He has written about how he and his wife actually moved to Tennessee before he took on this role, obviously, to put their children in a classical Christian school network.

David Goodwin, who you heard there, actually wrote a piece with -- wrote a book with Pete Hegseth on education. He runs that association.

You can start to see all these figures and ideologies are connected, something I explore closely in my upcoming documentary on "THE WHOLE STORY WITH ANDERSON COOPER" this Sunday at 8:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific time on CNN or the next day on CNN's All Access streaming platform.

BLITZER: Can't wait to watch the entire documentary.

BROWN: Yes.

BLITZER: Good work.

BROWN: I hope people do.

BLITZER: I'm sure they will. Thank you very much for that.

And, to our viewers, thanks very much for joining us this morning.

BROWN: "INSIDE POLITICS" with our friend and colleague Dana Bash starts after a short break.