Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Robert Kennedy Jr. Clashes with Senators; RFK Jr. Faces Growing Calls to Resign; Ukraine Security Guarantees; 26 Nations Pledge Troops for Postwar Security for Ukraine; China Cybersecurity Threats; Salt Typhoon to Pose National Security Threat; DOJ Looks to Ban Transgender People from Owning Guns; D.C. Sues Trump Administration; Giorgio Armani Dies at 91. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired September 04, 2025 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. And you're watching
"The Brief."
Just ahead this hour, Robert Kennedy Jr. clashes with senators from both parties over vaccine policies and the upheaval at the Department of Health
and Human Services. French President Emmanuel Macron says that 26 countries have now pledged to support a peacekeeping force inside Ukraine if there is
a ceasefire. And we look back on the career of fashion designer Giorgio Armani who passed away at the age of 91.
We begin here in Washington with just fiery exchanges on Capitol Hill between senators, Republicans and Democrats, and the health secretary,
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Appearing before the Senate Finance Committee, Kennedy came under a sustained barrage of criticism about changes at health
and human services and his Make America Healthy Again agenda, in particular, vaccine safety, the availability of healthcare and the firing
of workers at the CDC.
Kennedy says he is pro-science and not anti-vaccine, but he attacked the CDC's handling of the COVID pandemic and expressed distrust of vaccine
data. Here are some key moments from the hearing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT KENNEDY JR., U.S. HEALTH SECRETARY: We are the sickest country in the world. That's why we have to fire people at CDC.
SEN. RON WYDEN (D-OR): I hope that you'll tell the American people how many preventable child deaths are an acceptable sacrifice for enacting an
agenda that I think is fundamentally cruel and defies common sense.
KENNEDY JR.: I wasn't aware he said it, but I think I agree with it.
SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO): You agree with it? It's not true. It wasn't true when he said it. It is not true when you said it.
KENNEDY JR.: You're evading the question.
BENNET: You -- no, I'm asking the questions here, Mr. Kennedy.
KENNEDY JR.: You're evading that question.
BENNET: I'm asking the questions.
SEN. BILL CASSIDY (R-LA): I would say effectively we're denying people vaccine.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator Cantwell.
KENNEDY JR.: I, you're wrong. I don't know how many I --
SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): You are the Secretary of Health and Human Services. You don't have any idea how many Americans died from COVID?
KENNEDY JR.: I don't think anybody knows. I'm happy to have a detailed discussion with you about it. You're so wrong on your facts.
SEN. MARIA CANTWELL (D-WA): You're interrupting me. And sir, you're a charlatan. That's what you are.
KENNEDY JR.: That data.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And now, parents who decide that they do want their children to have COVID vaccine --
KENNEDY JR.: You're just making stuff up.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Annie Grayer is on Capitol Hill. You know, listen, these hearings, sadly, are often more theater than substance, right? If you look
at the latest polls, overall, 45 percent of Americans still approve of the way Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is handling his job. He seems to continue to have
the president's backing. Did anything change today?
ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, what was most notable coming out of that three hour very contentious hearing, Jim, was that it wasn't just
Democrats who were criticizing Kennedy. There were at least three Republican senators in that hearing room who went toe to toe with Kennedy
on a number of issues from his firing of the CDC director and upheaval at HHS to his views on vaccines and vaccine access and his ending of critical
research for some lifesaving vaccine.
So, starting with Senator Bill Cassidy, who was the deciding vote in getting Kennedy confirmed, went toe to toe with Kennedy and with a number
of times and said that he believes that Kennedy has gone back on his word with promising to not restrict vaccine access at all.
You also had Senator Tillis, who is a retiring Republican from North Carolina, who was also very critical of Kennedy in this hearing. But most
notably, I would say would be the criticism that we saw from Republican Senator Barrasso. He's the number two Republican in the Senate. He is a
doctor. And he said that he is deeply concerned with Kennedy's views on vaccines, the restrictions that he's putting in place. And that just shows
you that there is a lot of work that Kennedy has to do to win over and keep the good faith with the Republicans who confirmed him.
[18:05:00]
I mean, just an example of how delicate the situation is right now, when our colleague, Manu Raju, asked the leader of the Republican Senate, John
Thune, for his views on Kennedy after the hearing, and if he still supported Kennedy, Thune sidestepped, would not give full throttle support
and said instead that this was up to President Trump to decide.
So, this is a very delicate situation. This hearing put on full display that there are cracks in support even among the Republican Conference for
Kennedy and some of the more extreme views that he has taken specifically when it comes to vaccines and their access.
SCIUTTO: The trouble is he had those views when they had the chance to vote for or against his confirmation. And some of those critics, they voted
yes, as you said. Annie Grayer, thanks so much.
Well, after the hearing, the White House signal it stays firmly behind Kennedy. Joining me now, Tom Frieden, former CDC director, now president
and CEO of the Global Health Organization Resolve to Save Lives. He's also the author of the upcoming book, "The Formula for Better Health: How to
Save Millions of Lives - Including Your Own." That's something we might want to know.
Tom, good to have you on. You know, I wonder as we watched Kennedy there, I mean took, he took some heat, but he still got the job, right, and the
White House is sticking behind him. Are we, in effect, seeing the institutionalization of vaccine denialism in effect?
DR. TOM FRIEDEN, FORMER U.S. CDC DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT AND CEO, RESOLVE TO SAVE LIVES: Really, what we're seeing is it's not about Democratic versus
Republican, it's about lifesaving facts versus deadly fictions. And what we're hearing from Kennedy. And as you may have seen, there's a rumor that
they're going to put seven more anti-science, anti-vax people on the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices. This is really concerning.
This is about keeping our kids safe and healthy.
SCIUTTO: Is the U.S. already seeing, as a result of vaccine skepticism or vaccine avoidance, signs of the return of once eradicated or controlled
diseases? I mean, measles is the first and foremost case, because we are beginning to see an increase in measles cases. But are you already seeing
evidence of this playing out in this country?
DR. FRIEDEN: We need to keep in mind that it's not just a majority, it's an overwhelming majority of Americans who get their kids vaccinated. 92
percent most recently get their kids fully vaccinated. We had the largest measles outbreak in a generation in the U.S. related to decreasing vaccine
rates. Globally, this is really concerning.
Secretary Kennedy announced the withdrawal of U.S. support from Gavi, the vaccine alliance that protects the health of millions of kids around the
world. But what we're seeing more rapidly is a decrease in trust. A decrease in basic facts. Look, you can agree or disagree about all sorts of
things, but the facts are really very clear. The simple truth is that if you get a COVID vaccine, you're less likely to end up in an intensive care
unit or the morgue.
SCIUTTO: But the thing is, Kennedy was challenged on that in the hearing, and he said, I just don't believe the numbers. I mean, he was asked
directly by Senator Warren, how many people died in the pandemic. We know that, it's 1.2 million, I believe. And he is like, well, I don't really
believe those numbers. I mean, and now, he's running the agency, right, that gives out the guidance. I mean, if he doesn't buy it, that's going to
have real effect on this country's policies, is it not?
DR. FRIEDEN: Absolutely. We are losing not only the ability to protect Americans, but the ability to know whether our protections are in place.
Recent information has come out that they're undermining the system to track foodborne illnesses. So, we won't know how much listeria there is.
And listeria causes really serious problems. It can cause meningitis. It can cause miscarriages. They're not only undermining the science, they're
undermining our ability to track the damage that's being done.
SCIUTTO: No question. Listen, my sister got listeria infection. She nearly died from it. It's real. Now, you have a state like Florida, which is going
to rescind, it seems, vaccine mandates for school children. Florida's a big state, right, in this country. As you see that happen at the state level,
and as you have someone at the top of the HHS and above the CDC like Kennedy, are we going to see more of those requirements disappear? And if
we do, will we see that 92 percent figure you mentioned go down even further? Because as I -- you're the scientist, but don't you need to be
closer to 95 percent for herd immunity?
[18:10:00]
DR. FRIEDEN: What we're seeing is a lot of variability among states, with really low rates, down around 80 percent in some states, and that really is
opening the door for measles. These are routine immunizations for school entry so that there aren't big outbreaks in schools. I've evaluated big
outbreaks in schools as -- in my work as a disease detective or epidemic intelligence service officer.
They can be very rapid. You've got kids there who may have asthma or leukemia or other diseases. You have teachers who are on treatment for
cancer or immune disease. These are real problems. This is about Americans being safe. And it's not just tomorrow, already what we're seeing is
because of the irrational and unscientific changes to the COVID vaccination schedule, healthy adults, pregnant women, parents who want their healthy
kids vaccinated are going to have a much harder time getting the COVID vaccine for them this fall.
SCIUTTO: I hear you. There was an op-ed in The New York Times written by former leaders of the CDC, quoting here now, it says, "This is unlike
anything our country has ever seen before." Given that the CDC's mission in the past has historically been bipartisan and science-based. Do you agree
with that assessment? And then, where does this take us? I mean, is -- should we conclude we're going to see these diseases return?
DR. FRIEDEN: Well, let's hope not. The fact is this isn't about Democratic or Republican, this really is about fact versus fiction.
SCIUTTO: Yes.
DR. FRIEDEN: And you have to look hard at what Kennedy is doing. Not only is he saying things that are false, but he's doing things that are really
harmful, undermining our vaccine protections, undermining recommendations, closing whole programs that prevent cancer and reduce smoking rates.
SCIUTTO: And we should note, the vaccine Trump used to celebrate it, right? Claim credit for it. Operation Warp Speed. He took the vaccine
himself.
DR. FRIEDEN: And he deserves it. He deserves it.
SCIUTTO: He does. Now, he seems to be --
DR. FRIEDEN: He deserves it. Operation Warp Speed was a huge success story.
SCIUTTO: And that's a fact. The trouble is another fact folks seem to be running away from on that. Well, Tom Friedman, Dr. Tom Friedman, thanks so
much for joining. We look forward to having you back.
DR. FRIEDEN: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: French President Emmanuel Macron announced more than two dozen nations have now pledged to provide peacekeeping troops for security to
Ukraine, "quote, "if a ceasefire agreement is reached with Russia."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EMMANUEL MACRON, FRENCH PRESIDENT (through translator): We have 26 countries that have formally committed to deploy as a force of reassurance
in Ukraine to be present on land, at sea, or in the air, to bring this reassurance to the Ukrainian territory the day after a ceasefire or peace.
In the coming days, we are going to finalize the American support for these security guarantees. The United States, as I mentioned, has been involved
in every step of the process.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: This comes after a group of Ukraine's allies met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Paris and had a call with President Trump. Joining
us now, Stephen Sestanovich, senior fellow for Russia and Eurasian Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, served as U.S. ambassador-at-large to
the states that had previously been part of the Soviet Union. Ambassador, thanks so much for joining.
STEPHEN SESTANOVICH, RUSSIA AND EURASIAN STUDIES, COUNCIL OF FOREIGN RELATIONS, SENIOR FELLOW, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, FORMER AMBASSADOR-
AT-LARGE TO THE FORMER SOVIET UNION AND AUTHOR, "MAXIMALIST" AMERICA IN THE WORLD": Pleasure.
SCIUTTO: First, let's begin with this peacekeeping force. I wonder, is the French president, in effect, limiting the possibility here by saying, there
will be a peacekeeping force if there's a ceasefire? Because I know you have expressed your doubts as to whether a ceasefire can be reached, given
Russia's current position here that may be the best you can hope for as some sort of armistice. Well, perhaps that's -- those are the same things,
but do you think this is a realistic proposal for troops on the ground?
SESTANOVICH: Well, when you have this many European countries getting together and saying they're committed to it and hoping to work with the
United States to make it a reality, you have to take it seriously. In fact, I think it's important to step back just a bit and recognize the way in
which European countries have focused in a more unified way on their own security and on trying to strengthen the transatlantic alliance. They're
not just trying to please President Trump, although they've done that by committing to increased defense spending and so forth, but they're worried
about the direction of U.S. policy. They want to work harder to get Trump to please them.
Now, about this ceasefire proposal, the troops that are supposed to be committed are for a peacekeeping force after there's an agreement. And of
course, you know, in an obvious way that gives Russia a veto over the possibility because the Russians don't have to agree to a ceasefire.
[18:15:00]
SCIUTTO: Yes.
SESTANOVICH: One of the big corrections is there enough agreement between the United States and European countries about how to move the Russians
toward such an agreement, about increasing the pressure on them. And there wasn't a lot of talk about that today.
SCIUTTO: Yes. What is the impact of President Trump repeatedly threatening more pressure in the form of increased economic sanctions, even setting
deadlines, and then repeatedly blowing through those deadlines?
SESTANOVICH: You know, it's like any threat that one doesn't deliver on, it makes the next one less credible. And I think you'd have to say the
conviction on the Russian side that the Americans don't really mean it has got to be stronger. That's precisely what the Europeans are worried about.
They are -- and that's why they were very eager to have President Trump's adviser, Steve Witkoff, at the meeting, why they've -- why, as you just
heard, president Macron said, we've been working with the United States every step of the way, so that there's no daylight between them. And a
recognition that in order to get to this ceasefire, there's going to have to be more pressure on the Russians.
President Trump addressed that in the call that he apparently -- that he had with the with the European leaders, but he did it in a very indirect
way. He said, you know, it's very important for European countries not to buy Russian oil. He talked about the need for China, for the Europeans to
put pressure on China not to support Russia. And he's got tariffs on India. But he hasn't really talked about pressure on Russia itself. And that's the
anxiety that the Europeans have, that for all the talk about pushing the Chinese, pushing the Indians, pushing the Europeans, that President Trump
is not ready to push the Russians.
SCIUTTO: He has also dangled concessions such as Ukraine giving up more territory than Russia has already gained by force of arms. What is the
impact of dangling concessions like that which no Ukrainian government, I can imagine, could accept at this stage of the negotiations, but also
without, it seems, demanding, a comparable concession from Russia?
SESTANOVICH: This was a subject that was on the minds of all the European leaders when they gathered in Washington after the Alaska summit between
Putin and Trump. Because what they wanted to do is get Trump away from the idea that, you know, there has to be a big peace agreement of the kind that
the Russians are pushing, that Putin has argued for in which there are a lot of land swaps. They don't think that's realistic. They think for the
Ukrainian government, that's not just politically difficult, but it's militarily crazy.
This would be yielding a very important and very fortified line that would make it easier for the Russians to attack them in the future. If you want
to have confidence that you can deter Russia going forward, you don't give them strong positions from which to launch a new offensive.
SCIUTTO: We are close to three weeks out from the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska, which was supposed to move to dial. What did it gain, the U.S., if
anything? What did it gain in Russia?
SESTANOVICH: It gained Putin an end to his isolation, which we think worries him, but more important, it gained him a kind of direct -- a
stronger personal connection to the president of the United States, and a kind of read, presumably, of what the president is really up to.
Now, you know, you can say President Trump is influenced by the last person he talks to. He's influenced by Putin when he talks to him in Alaska, but
then he comes back to Washington and talks to all the Europeans and seems to have backed away from the view that you need the kind of big agreement
that Putin is talking about that involves major concessions by the Ukrainians.
What Putin may have done is strengthened disunity within the western alliance. But the immediate result that seems to have been produced by the
summit is that the western unity is greater.
[18:20:00]
The mystery, of course, is how much the United States is prepared to be part of that unity. And that's still disturbing. Europeans are -- you know,
they read, today in The Washington Post, there's a report that says Europe -- United States is terminating its security programs in Europe along the
frontline with Russia. That has Europeans wondering who are we talking to and can we get a consistent line about a commitment to our security and to
Ukraine's security.
SCIUTTO: Or are they on their own, in effect? Ambassador Stephen Sestanovich, thanks so much for joining.
SESTANOVICH: Pleasure.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead, China pulled all the stops out this week with its very public display of military might during celebrations marking the 80th
anniversary of the end of World War II. What China did not show us is very much worrying security experts as well. The latest on China's growing
cybersecurity attack and threat. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." Across the board gains on Wall Street, Thursday. All this despite a second straight day of weak U.S. jobs
data. A new report from ADP says only 54,000 jobs were created by private firms last month, far short of expectations. A separate study shows that
service sector employment contracted for a third straight month. The U.S. said Wednesday the job openings have fall onto their lowest levels in
almost a year. The monthly U.S. Jobs report is due out Friday. Weakness in that report caused President Trump to, well, fire the head of the Bureau of
Labor Statistics last month. He didn't like the numbers. The president claims BLS rigged the numbers to make him look bad. There is no evidence of
that.
During confirmation hearings before the Senate Thursday, Stephen Marin, the Trump picked to temporarily fill a vacant Fed governor's seat, was asked if
he believes last month's numbers were falsified for political purposes. He dodged the question.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): Do you think that the statistics were rigged in order to make the present look bad?
STEPHEN MIRAN, FED GOVERNOR NOMINEE: I think the statistics were allowed to deteriorate in quality steadily over the long -- over long period of
time.
VAN HOLLEN: That's a very different issue. We may agree or disagree on that, but that's very different than suggesting that they were
intentionally rigged. Are you seriously suggesting, as the president did, that the numbers were rigged? Just a yes or no.
[18:25:00]
MIRAN: I believe that the numbers were allowed to deteriorate without taking corrective actions.
VAN HOLLEN: That's non-responsive. I mean, it's not --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Miran said that if he's confirmed he will be able to act independently from the president, that's despite the fact that he will be
taking a unpaid leave of absence from his current White House role as the head of the Council of Economic Advisors, it's direct tie to the
administration.
China's military might advance weaponry we're on full display in Beijing on Wednesday. It was a lavish parade marking the 80th anniversary of the end
of World War II. In addition to Beijing's state of art hardware, western security officials are increasingly worried about another weapon in
Beijing's arsenal. It's cyber warfare capabilities. And what is believed to be its growing army of state-sponsored hackers.
Global Security Agency had a recent joint statement that Chinese state- backed hackers continue to target sensitive infrastructure globally. It comes as new details emerge about the extent of a major cyber-attack by a
group called Salt Typhoon that is seen as one of Beijing's most ambitious hacking operations.
Jacquelyn Schneider joins me now. She's director of the Hoover War Gaming and Crisis Simulation Initiative at Stanford University. Jackie, thanks so
much for joining.
JACQUELYN SCHNEIDER, HARGROVE HOOVER FELLOW, HOOVER INSTITUTION: Yes, great.
SCIUTTO: So, the more we learn about this Salt Typhoon attack, the bigger it becomes, the more extensive it becomes, the more ambitious. Accessing,
it seems, data about virtually every American as well as millions of citizens of other countries. Do we have any idea why exactly what China
might intend to do with this information?
SCHNEIDER: Yes, and I think it's important for people to realize, even though the scope of the data that they were able to access is remarkably
huge, this is, in some ways, a very intimate cyber spying operation. So, it seems like they are focused primarily on key individuals. So, they're
looking at the very senior leaders of U.S. and other countries, whether that's in the government, political, defense, businesses, and they're able
to, you know, get people's voicemails, to see their geolocation, to see, you know, where they're staying and how they're getting there. So, there's
this kind of like intimate pattern of life that they seem to be creating.
In addition, we know that they've been able to access some National Guard networks. So, there seems to be a very kind state level spying that's
occurring in which they're trying to understand the senior level decision makers within the United States and other countries as well as, you know,
government, national defense and security within the United States. So that, you know, if there were to be a crisis or a contingency, they
would've information, intimate information about how the U.S., for example, can mobilize the National Guard.
SCIUTTO: OK. So, senior officials, military movements, and by the way, targets of China for many years via other means, when you look at the
broader tar target set here, you and me, in effect, right, our families, et cetera, how might China weaponize that information? You've mentioned, for
instance, the possibility of propaganda campaigns or political influence operations.
SCHNEIDER: Yes. And I think that's important for people to understand that that's the real effect to kind of normal Americans. So, this is not the
type of situation where you're going to see your information show up on a big list of information that leads to a ransomware attack or that, you
know, your banking information will be accessed. Instead, what they're looking at is how they can influence the decisions that are made in the
United States.
So, can they lobby different kind of congressional representatives or senators? Are there public opinion about U.S. foreign policy that the
Chinese can somehow influence with propaganda or some sort of campaign? And then, I think, in general, the Chinese are really prone to using this
information to steal intellectual property, to get comparative advantage in both technological growth as well as defense technology.
SCIUTTO: What does this tell us about China's capabilities as compared to U.S. capabilities? And is it possible and/or likely that the U.S. is doing
something similar we just don't know about it?
SCHNEIDER: Well, I mean, here's hoping, right, that the U.S. is doing something similar. I mean, there's something about this that is -- I mean,
you've noticed I've tried very hard not to say cyber-attack. I mean, this is really spy on spy at its core.
[18:30:00]
This is kind of what states are trying -- the information that states are trying to get from each other in order to coerce and control at this kind
of big geopolitical level. What makes this one different is that in the past, the Chinese were kind of crude. They were often caught. They were --
they used kind of unsophisticated techniques, but here, we're seeing sophistication. We're seeing patience. We're seeing persistence. And we're
seeing a significant evolution of their cyber capabilities. So, this is really putting them in the league with somebody like the United States and
Russia instead of where they were previously, which was kind of in a catch- up situation.
SCIUTTO: Well, something to follow closely and we know you are. Jacqueline Schneider, thanks so much for joining.
SCHNEIDER: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: Straight ahead, the Trump administration weighs banning trans people from owning guns. Why they're doing it, or why they say they are,
and the potential legal problems that such a move might face.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto. Here are the international headlines we're watching today.
The White House is praising the U.S. health secretary's testimony on Capitol Hill, signaling it remains very much behind his effort to continue
to restrict vaccines. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lied to Americans about COVID-19, citing its
recommendations on wearing masks and getting vaccine boosters. He defended his ousting of the CDC director and said there could be more firings ahead.
Israel says it now controls 40 percent of Gaza city ahead of a planned siege that would force the entire population out. A network of Palestinian
NGOs warns that would be the most dangerous displacement since this war began. Many residents say they will not leave despite relentless Israeli
strikes.
[18:35:00]
Responding to U.S. President Donald Trump's demand to release all hostages in Gaza, Hamas says it is ready to enter a comprehensive deal to end the
war.
Investigators in Portugal are now trying to determine why a funicular railway in downtown Lisbon derailed, killing at least 16 people.
Authorities say five Portuguese citizens, two South Koreans, a Swiss national and one U.S. citizen are among the victims. Another 21 were
injured. The railway is one of the city's most popular tourist attractions.
Sources say the Trump administration is now looking to ban transgender people from owning guns. The move follows last week's shooting at a
Minneapolis Catholic Church, which police say was carried out by a transgender woman. This would be a major escalation in Trump's broader
fight against transgender rights. It would also likely be legally problematic, setting up a fight over the Second Amendment, potentially even
angering some conservatives. We should note that transgender people make up a very, very small portion of mass shooters in this country.
The Violence Prevention Project at Hamline University tracked mass shooters who killed at least four people in a public place all the way back to 1966.
Of those, 192 shooters were non-transgender men, four were female, one was transgender.
Evan Perez joins me now. I mean, the data is clear there, tiny, tiny percentage of mass shooters here. So, what argument does the administration
make for this?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR U.S. JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, they are looking at the entire -- look, this is part of a broader attack on the rights of
transgender Americans. And, you know, obviously the president, one of the first things he did was to ban their service in the U.S. military. He's
ordered that the Bureau of Prisons stop accommodating transgender identities, try -- stop providing care for those people. And so, now, this
really carries it forward.
And some of the same language that they used in the ban on the military -- on military service by members -- by transgender Americans is the same
language they're going after here, which is to declare gender dysphoria mental illness. And then using -- they can use rulemaking, they believe,
which is administrative work, right?
SCIUTTO: Right.
PEREZ: It doesn't go through Congress. It doesn't take any other format.
SCIUTTO: Like the bump stock ban for instance --
PEREZ: Correct, correct. And then really leave it up to Americans to challenge that in court and see whether that goes. And so, you know, I
talked to activists -- of civil rights activists on the transgender issue, and one of the things they pointed out is that. Because the administration
has been successful in so many of the other things, they don't discount the possibility that this will actually go through. And so, they're very, very
concerned.
And they're also warning, as you just did, about the slippery slope, right? Because the idea here is that if you could do this to one group of people,
then what's to say that a future administration can't say veterans who have PTSD diagnosis, for instance, why should they be allowed to have guns, if
you look at those numbers, there's a lot more of them represented in shooters and attackers per se.
SCIUTTO: One interesting thing here is that the right in this country has for years opposed any restriction on anyone, you know, getting gun
virtually, right? I mean, there -- even folks who were on terror watch list. You remember this, yes.
PEREZ: They're against red flag laws, for instance, right?
SCIUTTO: So, are there members of the conservative or right-wing movement who say, hey, wait a second, let's watch before we do this?
PEREZ: Well, some people inside the administration who are very much on that point of view, Jim, are raising that concern internally. They believe
that this would be legal. But we reached out to some of the gun rights organizations and we'd never heard back from them today. So, we'll wait to
see whether that changes over the coming days.
But it's very clear that this issue does have, you know, some salience, I think, for some of those groups because, again, they're against any
restriction of gun rights, but they're also not in favor of transgender rights in America.
SCIUTTO: Evan Perez, thanks so much.
PEREZ: Thanks.
SCIUTTO: Well, Washington, D.C. is now suing the Trump administration over the president's deployment of the National Guard and the Capitol accusing
the president of breaking federal law. I'm going to speak to a constitutional law expert about the case. The law right after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:40:00]
SCIUTTO: This is just in to CNN, President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order on Friday, changing the name of the Defense
Department to the Department of War. That's what a White House official is telling CNN. We should note, they changed that decades ago in the other
direction. Here's some of the reasons the president gave late last month for changing the name.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I think because you know, Department of Defense, we won the World War I, World War II. It was called the Department
of War. And to me that's really what it is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Washington, D.C. is suing the Trump administration over its deployment of the National Guard in the Capitol. The D.C. Attorney General
accuses President Trump of violating the constitution and federal law.
Last month, Trump deployed troops in the nation's capital as part of, what he says, is his anti-crime agenda. They are not expected to leave anytime
soon. CNN reported earlier, their military orders are expected to be extended through December.
Michael Gerhardt is a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina. He joins me now. Michael, thanks so much. Good to have you.
MICHAEL GERHARDT, LAW PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: All right. So, D.C. is arguing, as many legal experts have noted, that the military legally should not be involved in law enforcement
domestically. How persuasive is that claim in this case?
GERHARDT: I actually think any claim that the president has authority to do what he did is just false and wrong. The president has no authority to
do this, just like the judge declared. And under federal law, the Posse Comitatus Act, the president is clearly violating that act.
SCIUTTO: Given the D.C. guard is under direct presidential command and that the District of Columbia itself is federally administered, does he
have more legal or constitutional leeway here to do so as opposed to in other states?
GERHARDT: I don't believe so. The president gains his authority from two sources. One is the constitution and the others that would be a federal
statute. The Constitution does not give the president any authority to use the military for domestic purposes, not in the Constitution. So, that
leaves us with a federal statute. The only relevant statute here is the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the use of the military in domestic
affairs. So, it's just the opposite of what the president would like to do.
[18:45:00]
SCIUTTO: As you know, this Supreme Court with its six-three conservative majority has often ruled in such a way that expands rather than restricts
presidential power. Do you have any -- and this is a little bit of, you know, tea leave reading here, but do you have a sense of how this will play
out when it reaches the Supreme Court inevitably?
GERHARDT: I wish I could say yes. I think if the trend continues, the Supreme Court will give President Trump what he wants. He's on a winning
streak right now of 18 straight wins before the Supreme Court. In contrast, the president has lost most of the time in the lower courts, just as he did
in this particular instance. And so, if the court follows what the lower courts are doing, and they're just trying to follow law, then Trump loses.
He may be betting that he can win in the Supreme Court. The federal law that applies here restricts presidential authority. According to that law,
Congress has the authority to call out troops or use troops domestically, not the president.
SCIUTTO: The trouble is, you know, one -- for one, Congress seems to have ceded a whole host of constitutional powers to this president on a whole
host of things, including legislation that's already passed even by bipartisan majorities. And then the other piece here is that Trump's just
doing it, right? I mean, you got National Guard troops here in D.C. You saw troops deployed in L.A. recently, he's now threatening to deploy troops in
Chicago and New Orleans. I mean, the courts are moving slowly.
I mean, are the courts -- can they even stand in the way of him or just as a practical matter, it's already happening?
GERHARDT: Well, the court has ruled, at least in California, that the president acted illegally there. So, that court has come forward. There's
been another lawsuit just filed in D.C., which may well track or reach the same finding or conclusion as the case did in California. And so, I think
that lower court judges, they're doing their job. Every indication is they're doing their job and they're doing their job well.
They're the fact finders, and they've ruled against the president more than once. The question here is going to be whether Congress acts, but if
Congress doesn't act and it hasn't acted, there's nothing in the Constitution that says the president has the authority to act when Congress
doesn't use its own authority. That's just not in the Constitution. That's not our Constitution.
We have a federal law which restricts what the president may do and gives the authority to Congress to perhaps arrange for the military for some
limited domestic uses. The president has no inherent authority here at all, and he has no statutory authority. He has no constitutional authority. And
therefore, he is acting illegally.
SCIUTTO: Ultimately, we will see, I suppose, where the Supreme Court stands on this. Professor Michael Gerhardt, thanks so much for joining.
GERHARDT: Thank you very much. Good to see you.
SCIUTTO: A mother from Venezuela living in the U.S., fearing deportation herself after her husband was detained by ICE. Now, with school starting in
New York, she is also worried her children could be the next targets for raids. Maria Santana has the story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): Scared, full of fear, anxiety.
MARIA SANTANA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voiceover): This immigrant mother of two breaks down in tears, torn between taking her children to school and the
risk of being taken away by ICE agents.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): I'm afraid the same thing will happen to me as to my husband, that they'll arrest me, or I fear that at
school, during these raids they talk about, they could take my children. All of this haunts me every day.
SANTANA (voice-over): She says her husband was detained by federal immigration agents over Memorial Day weekend during a family outing in New
York. At the family's request, we are not using their names. Originally from Venezuela, she says they both had temporary protected status and
pending asylum claims.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has not replied to our request for details about the father's arrest. Court records show that he had no prior
criminal history, but he remains in federal custody.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): I used to pick them up. He took them to school. I feel this year will be very hard for me.
SANTANA: I hear you're learning English. Yes?
SANTANA (voice-over): The children, heading into third and eighth grades, say they are excited to go back to school and see their friends, but they
desperately miss their father.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): I wish he was here to see us, to see how we're doing. Because whenever we left school and he picked us up,
sometimes we went to the park or he took us out somewhere.
SANTANA (voice-over): Their mother says that they are also terrified, worried that she might get arrested too.
[18:50:00]
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): Since what happened to their dad, they don't want to leave my side. They say, mom, what if I'm at school
and you go and you don't come back? What if they take you, mom? Why is this happening to us?
MANUEL CASTRO, IMMIGRANT AFFAIRS COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK MAYOR'S OFFICE: We understand our families have a lot of fear, a lot of anxiety.
SANTANA (voice-over): City officials acknowledge that some parents may want to keep their children at home, even as they insist that schools are
safe.
CASTRO: There are strict protocols that our teachers, our principals, our school systems must follow, because it is the law. We cannot cooperate with
immigration enforcement and any of the families and children in our school systems.
SANTANA (voice-over): But for this mother, this year feels more like a leap of faith. Praying that her family can stay together as her children
continue to grow and learn.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): Children are meant to be happy. Why does this happen? I don't understand it because we all have children.
SANTANA (voice-over): Maria Santana, CNN, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: Just ahead, the fashion world says goodbye to a legend. Remembering Italian designer Giorgio Armani right after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Legendary Italian designer Giorgio Armani has died at the age of 91. Barbie Latza Nadeau takes a look at his life and legacy.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BARBIE LATZA NADEAU, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Throughout the decades, Armani made "made in Italy" famous throughout the world, building
one of the world's most successful fashion and lifestyle brands.
GIORGIO ARMANI, FASHION DESIGNER (through translator): At the end of the day, our goal is to make people look more attractive. You know, more
beautiful.
NADEAU (voice over): And Giorgio Armani's designs did just that. The Armani style had timeless, refined elegance, simple clean lines, subtle
colors. It was all guided by one clear principle.
ARMANI (through translator): Always keep in mind what people can actually wear and what actually makes them look better and feel better about
themselves.
NADEAU (voice over): Armani's power suits were big hits with the public, and his signature style made him the go to designer for some of Hollywood's
biggest stars, including George Clooney, Leonardo DiCaprio and Richard Gere.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What are you wearing tonight?
JULIA ROBERTS, ACTRESS: I'm wearing a beautiful Armani gown that he made just for me.
NADEAU (voice over): Armani was born in the northern Italian town of Piacenza in 1934 and endured a difficult childhood.
ARMANI (through translator): I grew up after the war, and after the war years. It was actually, you know, it was dangerous. There wasn't very much.
There was no food. My mother used to spend all her time looking for food.
NADEAU (voice over): He first studied medicine, hoping to become a doctor, but later dropped out, realizing he simply lacked the drive for it. Then
his life took a fateful turn.
ARMANI (through translator): I wasn't born with an extreme passion for fashion. Even when I was a kid, I never had such an inspiration of becoming
a fashion designer. It was almost by coincidence that I joined a big department store, La Rinascente, through an acquaintance.
[18:55:00]
NADEAU (voice over): His work in the menswear department sparked an interest in fashion, and he discovered he had a gift for it.
Armani later became a freelance designer with the encouragement of his friend and business partner, Sergio Galeotti, and launched his own menswear
label in 1975, where his signature color, "greige," halfway between gray and beige, was born.
ARMANI (through translator): I think that the push that Sergio gave me, that courage inspired me to start a new life. It was pivotal for my
success.
NADEAU (voice over): And pivotal to his success in America, where movies and TV shows popularized his designs, starting with "American Gigolo" in
1980, and dressing stars in more than 200 films, including "The Dark Knight" and "The Wolf of Wall Street."
At the age of 90, he also designed the Italian Olympic team uniform for the 2026 Milan-Cortina games. He took a hands-on approach to running his
empire, for which he was the sole shareholder, and remained deeply involved in day to day operations of his company into his '90s, fueled by a passion
for fashion.
ARMANI (through translator): The older you get, the more active you are, the younger you keep. Yes, I mean, the secret is to do something that you
love.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: And he looked really good in his own suits as well. Thanks so much for your company today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been
watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
