Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

CNN International: U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling on Mail Ballots; U.S. Threatens Sweeping Sanctions on Nations Tied to Iran; U.K. Giving Kyiv Blueprints to Build Long-Range Missiles; Ukraine Celebrates 35 Years of Independence; Trump Threatens 50 Percent Tariffs on Canadian Vehicles, Metals; Trump: Fentanyl is a "Scourge" on the United States. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired August 24, 2026 - 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, "THE BRIEF": 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, the U.S. Supreme Court issues a critical ruling on mail-in voting just ahead of the mid-term elections. We're going to explain

the impact in just a moment. Iran says it is fully prepared for more U.S. sanctions as the Trump administration threatens what it called an economic

D-Day for the country. And the opioid crisis has touched millions of people here in the United States. Author Stephanie Wells -- Wittels Wachs is one

of them, losing her brother to addiction far too young. She'll join me to discuss her powerful new book.

Well, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that President Donald Trump can begin implementing parts of his executive order aimed at restricting mail-

in voting. The plan would allow the Department of Homeland Security to compile state-specific voter eligibility lists. It would also allow the

U.S. Postal Service to require states to submit lists of eligible voters.

Kristen Holmes joins me now. And, Kristen, a closely watched case here. And while I know that appeals are not just possible, but likely, can you

explain the administration's intention here? Do they intend to draw up lists and then reject voters in states that they say can't vote?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: What they're trying to do here is put some kind of federal oversight on the election process,

which has been usually fully in the court of the states. And that's really what we've seen from this administration as a whole. And we should make it

known that the Trump administration is celebrating this as a win.

The reason why it might not be as quick of a win as they're hoping is because there are still a number of legal hurdles that they're going to

have to go through before any of this can be implemented. For example, you talk about the U.S. Postal Service's role in this executive order. The idea

would be that they would have to get lists from the states giving them who was requesting a mail-in ballot. And then they would essentially be giving

specific ballots that were tracked through the U.S. postal system.

That has actually been blocked at another lower court on another lower court ruling, meaning that it can't automatically go into effect. There's

likely going to have to be more legal action that is taken there. This was about a specific case.

The idea of all of this, again, is about that federal oversight, trying to see who's eligible to vote, trying to get states to turn over voter

records. And for right now, the Trump administration is very pleased with this result. It should be noted also that the Supreme Court did not weigh

in on the legality of this. They essentially said that the states, they brought the case, but they didn't have anything to bring it on, saying that

none of the hypotheticals that they were raising as to why this could cause problems had actually occurred yet. And because nothing had occurred yet,

they couldn't, they very well stopped the process from happening because none of these hypotheticals had taken place.

So, again, there are more hurdles down the road once this is actually implemented. The question, again, also being if this was going to impact

midterms. We're just weeks away from the start of early voting for those midterms. It's unclear right now that this could be implemented quick

enough to actually be part of the midterm voting because of all of those legal hurdles and what stands in the way of this actually being

implemented.

All of this to say, President Trump, they have been looking for ways to curb mail-in voting, to have some kind of oversight into the voting

process. And this certainly paves the way for that. This is the starting steps to get them in position to provide that kind of oversight, Jim.

SCIUTTO: And remarkable given that, well, the Constitution gave the states the ability to run elections. It's quite a change in precedent. We'll see

how it stands. Kristen Holmes at the White House, thanks so much.

Well, the Trump administration is issuing a new threat to impose sweeping new sanctions on any nation that refuses to cut economic ties with Iran.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has warned that any entity or nation or individual that facilitates money laundering on behalf of Tehran will be

removed from the U.S. dollar financial system.

[18:05:00]

He did not provide specific timelines. When asked whether Chinese banks would face such sanctions, he said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT BESSENT, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: We want to make clear to here today that no one is above the reach of U.S. sanctions, that if they

facilitate transactions and are part of the ecosystem that turns Iranian oil into money, into repression, they will be targeted. We find that the

best way to engage with countries is through quiet diplomacy, and we are level-setting with every country to tell them our expectations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Tehran has dismissed the new threat, saying the U.S. is not in an economic position to restrict its economic ties with other countries.

Iran's top negotiator, Mohammad Ghalibaf, says, quote, "The Americans know that no one believes their bluster." This comes as some Iranian officials

have recently acknowledged inflation and real economic hardship in their country. Iran's currency, the rial, has fallen to a record low now against

the U.S. dollar.

Joining me now is Richard Nephew, the principal deputy coordinator for sanctions policy at the State Department. He was. He is now a senior

research scholar at Columbia University. Richard, good to have you.

RICHARD NEPHEW, FORMER PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT COORDINATOR FOR SANCTIONS POLICY, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT: Thanks very much for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, the administration has applied a whole host of measures to pressure Iran economically. It calls this an economic D-Day. Are these

measures, in your view, a significant level up from those already in place?

NEPHEW: Frankly, no. A lot of the measures that were discussed by Secretary Besant today are the kinds of sanctions that we've had in place

for years. And frankly, a lot of the work that he was talking about that's going on now, this quiet diplomacy with those who may be doing business

with Iran, has been essentially a daily bit of activity for the Treasury Department, State Department and others, you know, at this point, going

back decades, with a brief interruption for the nuclear deal we had some years ago.

So, a lot of these tools are the same. A lot of the people who are doing this engagement are the same. Really, there isn't a whole lot that is new

here other than the threat that this is somehow going to be transformative for Iran's economy.

SCIUTTO: If one were to pick a country that does a great deal of business with Iran, it would be China, given how much oil in particular it imports

from there. You saw that he was asked quite directly, are Chinese banks and other entities going to face secondary sanctions? I mean, he didn't say

China, but he did seem to say, well, everybody. Is this administration, which is so focused on easing economic tensions with China, really going to

do that?

NEPHEW: Today, I think you'd have to conclude no, right? There have been plenty of opportunities for this administration to ramp up the pressure on

China, both when it took office, you know, now, what, 18 months or so ago, and then at various different stops along the way, as it's expanded its

maximum pressure campaign that it put back in place, or at least said it put back in place at the start of the administration, to the Xi and Trump

summit, where they were, you know, talking about these sorts of issues in Beijing.

There's no real evidence that the Trump administration has decided to significantly ramp up the sanctions pressure on China. They've imposed

sanctions on some of China's teapot refineries, these small oil refineries, and some of the facilitators and shippers, but that's really kind of a

keeping with what the Biden administration was doing before it.

So, at this point, I think it'd be pretty hard to say that the Trump administration has demonstrated a willingness to really ramp up the

pressure on China.

SCIUTTO: Do you see an actual path to reopening the Strait of Hormuz completely? Because Iranian officials say, well, they've got some economic

leverage over the U.S., and the fact is they do. I mean, with oil prices, gas prices, not just, of course, over the U.S., but those all around the

world who import oil through the Persian Gulf, the administration is claiming that oil is going through there more than we know. Is that

actually true?

NEPHEW: Well, at this point, it's hard to say. So, there are lots of people who are tracking the tankers that are allegedly coming through with

U.S. support and haven't been able to validate the numbers that the Trump administration has given us. On the other hand, sometimes it's hard to

validate these numbers, especially if ships are running opaquely and trying to avoid being detected.

I think the bigger thing that I would point to is that with the blockade in place, with the blockade the U.S. Navy has put in place, we're already

putting a significant amount of pressure on the Iranian economy. Sanctions are going to augment that and add to the pressure that's already being felt

there. But we've not seen thus far enough relief from the pressure Iran's putting in place to speed up our clock with Iran.

[18:10:00]

Instead, really, at this point, we're kind of at a stalemate, and the stalemate is going to benefit the Iranians.

SCIUTTO: You've argued the next Iran deal should be narrower and therefore easier to implement. So, how narrow exactly?

NEPHEW: Well, I think the most overriding imperative for the United States at this point is getting the Strait of Hormuz open to get commerce flowing

again, not just oil, but also refined products, which are really now the main shortfall, things like diesel and fertilizer, and, you know, trying to

make sure that the Global South, for instance, can have planting seasons and so forth.

And I think that to do that, the United States may need to drop the blockade and give some amount of limited sanctions relief. It would be good

to also get some transparency into Iran's nuclear program, some understanding of where their highly enriched uranium, the material that

you're going to weapons is right now.

But if our objective is to try and prevent Iran from continuing to be a threat, giving significant sanctions relief, lots of money to the IRGC, to

me, strikes as a bad idea. So, I think in the first instance, I would try and get the Strait open, trade that for the blockade, maybe a limited

sanctions relief, and then see what happens thereafter and know whether or not the IRGC is a reasonable negotiating party. I rather suspect we'll find

they aren't.

SCIUTTO: Richard Nephew, I appreciate you sharing your views.

NEPHEW: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: We do have an update now on the case of the Iranian photojournalist, Yalda Moaiery, who I spoke to just last week. Well, she

appeared in Iranian court on Sunday as she has tried to understand and appeal her conviction. You'll remember she was sentenced to 15 years in

prison earlier this month after the regime deemed her journalistic work hostile to the regime.

Her father tells me that in court she was asked to present her final defense, which her legal team views as a sign that her options for appeal

are likely running out. We will continue to update you on her case as it develops.

To Ukraine now, where the U.K. says it will give Kyiv access to classified missile technology in order to help Kyiv build long-range cruise missiles

designed by Britain and France. British Prime Minister Andy Burnham visited Kyiv as Ukraine marked its Independence Day. He chaired a meeting of

Ukraine's allies from the so-called Coalition of the Willing. They are promising to boost Ukraine's air defenses as it grapples with a dangerous

shortage of missile interceptors. Burnham says the U.K.'s support is unwavering.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDY BURNHAM, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: I am determined that we will work together to deliver the support you need, Mr. President, stronger than

ever. That means not just air defense, but stopping Russia launching their missiles in the first place, with sanctions that cut off their military

supply chain.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: France has confirmed the first full-scale military exercises of the so-called Coalition of the Willing will take place in Poland this

October and November. Those exercises will involve both British and French troops. The announcement comes as Ukraine's president is warning Russia

could call up another 300,000 troops later this year. This as Russia is already ramping up aerial attacks on Ukraine. Ukrainian media report

Russian drone strikes on an energy facility in the Mykolaiv region, in the south of Ukraine.

Joining me now is Oleksandr Senkevych, the mayor of Mykolaiv. He's joining us live from the city tonight. Mayor, thanks so much for taking the time.

OLEKSANDR SENKEVYCH, MAYOR OF MYKOLALV, UKRAINE: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: First, let me ask you about your safety and the safety of the citizens of Mykolaiv, given Russia's punishing missile attacks in recent

days and weeks.

SENKEVYCH: February 24, 2022, we are all in danger almost every day. So, we're used to it. And I would say that every day we are facing attacks,

different attacks from the Iranian drones, Shaheds, and missiles that hit our critical infrastructure, electricity, water supply and some -- and

other critical infrastructure like public transportation.

So, we're used to it. I mean, we found a way how to repair all that and renew our life every day, every next day after the attacks.

SCIUTTO: President Zelenskyy has been desperately asking for help from the U.S. and from Europe. It doesn't appear that more help is coming from the

U.S. President Trump has repeatedly said no. Europe says it will help. And now, you do have the offer of sharing this technology to allow Ukraine to

build these storm shadow cruise missiles.

[18:15:00]

But do you, from where you're sitting, are you seeing any of that help coming soon? Because the danger is right now it will only get worse as

winter approaches.

SENKEVYCH: Right. We feel this every winter for the last five years. Today is an Independence Day in Ukraine. 35 years ago, we got independence. And I

need to remind that in 1991, after the Soviet Union collapse, we got the independence. But today, we are fighting for independence, protecting it,

and let's say proving that we are a totally different country from Russia.

And you really clearly mentioned that President Trump said that there won't be any help from the United States anymore. But in 1994, we got a Budapest

memorandum where the United States, U.K., and Russia promised us to help protect our independence. And we got rid of our third world's biggest

nuclear potential. So, we got rid of our nuclear weapon. And this time, and this -- I mean, in the modern history, we got invasion from Russia. So, I

think the United States is obligated to protect us. But we have this information.

Anyway, the European community helps us a lot. Unfortunately, we have no anti-rockets ammunition to hit the hypersonic rockets, which really make a

mess in our cities. But fortunately, we have our hypersonic drones, which help us to intercept Russian drones, which helps a lot. And we decrease the

amount of attacks every day from 300 to, let's say, five.

But anyway, we need these technologies and rockets more and more because Russia, with the help of China and Iran, and with the troops of North Korea

attacking us, and they plan to expand this invasion in the winter time.

SCIUTTO: Today, of course, as you say, is Independence Day. Do you see anywhere in the near future Ukraine being able to enjoy its independence

and peace?

SENKEVYCH: We pray for that every day. We hope and we hope for the last five years that we will have the peace as soon as possible. I just

mentioned four different countries, which actually mentioned in U.S. strategy of defense, accepted January 23, 2026 this year. All these four

countries are threats, reviewed as threats for United States.

And now, we are fighting not only for our independence, but I would say for the Western civilization values, proving that the agreements established in

1945 by United Nations still act. And we also, to be honest, we protect our lives. But at the same time, we're proving every day that we don't want to

be a part of Russian culture or Russian world. We want to be a part of Western European community as United States and Europe.

And we I think we prove this and the conversations, if we are ready to be part of Europe or not, they're useless because we were born ready for that.

SCIUTTO: Well, as I often say to Ukrainians that I interview, given the threat, I hope you have a safe and peaceful evening there. And we

appreciate you joining.

SENKEVYCH: Thank you. Thank you for the invitation.

SCIUTTO: Well, still ahead, another kind of war, the U.S.-Canada trade war. Both sides accusing each other of being responsible for the collapse

of trade talks as President Trump is threatening enormous new tariffs. We're going to have the very latest next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:20:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back in today's Business Breakout, a mixed day on Wall Street. The Dow finished higher, thanks in part to a 2 percent drop in oil

prices. Weakness in chip stocks dragged down the NASDAQ.

Also, today, bond yields pulled back on reports that the U.S. Treasury could take further measures to lower long-term borrowing costs. Sources

tell CNBC the Treasury could tap into almost $1 trillion kept in its General Accounts Fund to purchase more Treasuries. Treasury Secretary Scott

Bessent's announcement last week to double bond buybacks helped bring down long-term yields, but only temporarily.

President Trump is now threatening to double tariffs on Canadian-built cars and car parts early next year after the breakdown in trade negotiations

between the two countries. Canada says it will impose retaliatory tariffs next month on steel, electronics, and other products. Canadian Prime

Minister Mark Carney said Monday his team had no choice but to walk away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK CARNEY, CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER: Well, we made progress, and we did make some progress in recent weeks. In the end, that momentum reversed, and

we could not accept what the U.S. had offered, nor could we give what they asked. Thank you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Mary Lovely joins me now. She's a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Mary, last year, The Wall Street

Journal called this the dumbest trade war. Today, they repeated it. What is the goal that you can establish? What is the goal, if any, that you can

perceive from Trump's tariffs and all the various demands that he's making here, given how integrated the two economies have been through the years?

MARY LOVELY, SENIOR FELLOW, PETERSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS: Yes, that's right. This is actually, the U.S.-Canada integration is

actually a massive success story. President Trump seems to be intent on retaliating for Canadian retaliation to the initial round of tariffs that

he imposed on them. And he's also, I think, setting up a situation where he would like to bring the Canadians to the table at USMCA, a bit with their

tail between the legs. And the Canadians have said, no, they're not going to do that.

So, there's two sort of different narratives here, what President Trump is trying to achieve, and what we might think of as a solid strategy to

improve economic security and economic prosperity in North America, which would look, I think, very different.

SCIUTTO: Are any U.S. or Canadian companies benefiting from this? I mean, if that's the putative goal here, right? Trump wants to support American

businesses. Does anybody have anything to gain?

LOVELY: Well, as we -- yes. With tariffs, there's always some companies that gain, because they face reduced competition.

[18:25:00]

On the whole, though, we've seen all along with Trump's push for tariffs, which is that we have a few gainers and massive losers spread across the

economy. Now, we know what's going to happen with these tariffs. We're going to see higher prices for goods that are now newly taxed. We're going

to see rearrangement, if this holds, of the U.S., Canada, and Canada auto integration -- integrated auto field. That means that U.S. cars will become

more insulated from competition, even with our northern neighbor, and more expensive.

So, it's going to start to really hurt not just small businesses, where there's been a lot of press reports on the effect on small businesses, but

also gradually chip away at the competitiveness of entire industries, like the auto sector.

SCIUTTO: You've been involved in analyzing trade for years, taking part, I'm sure, in your share of negotiations. President Trump has changed his

justification for tariffs multiple times. It was national security. Most recently, it's child labor laws. In this case, he accuses Canada of having

unfair trade practices in effect. He's particularly focused, for some reason, on the dairy industry.

Is it personal, in your view? Right? I mean, given -- according to Canadians, the U.S. side, at the last minute, tried to get Canada to end

language programs to support the French language in Canada, or to force Canada to align its other trade agreements with U.S. tariff policy. That

doesn't strike me as economic issues. It strikes me as a power play.

LOVELY: Well, I mean, as with all things with President Trump, there is certainly some personal aspect. There may be certain companies which stand

to gain from a decrease in the Canadian commitment to requirements for the use of the French language. We don't really know what's behind that.

But the -- if we are to take what Mark Carney said at face value, and it has been disputed by the Americans, we are to believe that the Americans

really added a bunch of demands at the last minute that really go beyond what is normally included, or really traditionally included in any way,

including this demand about the use of the French language, but also including U.S., in a sense, veto rights over their ability to sign trade

agreements, which has been a very active area of policy for Canadians as they seek to reduce their vulnerability by being so focused on business

with the United States.

So, there's a number of issues here that really tapped into concerns about Canadian sovereignty. Another, of course, being reports that the U.S. was

asking for exclusive access to Canadian critical minerals, something that basically would begin to make that sector a vassal to the United States.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

LOVELY: I think Mark Carney was quite articulate in these concerns.

SCIUTTO: That sounds a bit like a colony. Mary lovely, thanks so much for joining.

LOVELY: You're welcome.

SCIUTTO: Checking now some of today's other business headlines. The U.S. State of Alabama has opened a subpoena -- issued a subpoena to OpenAI over

the alarming security incident that made global headlines last month. Alabama says the case of A.I. agents escaping confinement and hacking into

companies outside may have violated the state's consumer protection laws. It is one of 15 states demanding the company preserve documents related to

that incident.

Shares of Chinese tech giant Alibaba fell almost 9 percent in Hong Kong trading Monday after announcing it will be selling more than $100 billion

worth of stock to fund its own A.I. investments. The news comes after the company announced a 75 percent drop in quarterly net profits due to the

cost of its A.I. buildout. It will be the third largest global stock sale this year behind offerings from Alphabet and Intel, who are also raising

money for their own A.I. development.

California's attorney general has called off face-to-face talks with Paramount over its planned merger with Warner Brothers Discovery, the

parent company of CNN. The two sides were scheduled to begin discussions on a possible settlement to the lawsuit today, which has frozen that merger in

place. But Rob Bonta, a California attorney general, says Paramount acted in bad faith by leaking some of the topics they were going to discuss.

Paramount denies that claim.

Well, Former Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen is speaking out about President Trump's efforts to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook over allegations

of mortgage fraud. She told CNN's Richard Quest it strikes at the central bank's very independence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JANET YELLEN, FORMER CHAIR, U.S. FEDERAL RESERVE: I do believe it's under threat. I've been very concerned about the attacks that President Trump has

made on the Fed.

[18:30:00]

Lisa -- the attempt to remove Lisa Cook for a cause that hasn't been spelled out to the public or to her, she hasn't had a chance to defend

herself. It remains to be seen how that will be sorted out. And the threat of criminal proceedings against Chair Powell, really, these are threats

that are unprecedented.

And I still see a Fed that is independently making decisions according to its best assessment of the economic outlook and what's needed to achieve

its congressional mandate. But I also see an administration that is trying to bring pressure to bear for monetary policy to be set in the way that

President Trump regards is appropriate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: That was former Federal Reserve Chair and former U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen during an interview with CNN's Richard Quest earlier

today.

Still to come, the midterm election is now 71 days away and a new ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court could have a big impact on how Americans can

cast their balance. Please do stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto. And here are the international headlines we're watching today.

The Supreme Court has granted President Donald Trump's request for permission to begin carrying out parts of his executive order aimed at

restricting mail-in ballots. Additional legal challenges could stand in the way of the plan before the November midterm elections, but the ruling with

those elections so close brings new uncertainty. Trump could impose policies given the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Homeland

Security on precedented roles in running elections.

[18:35:00]

The Trump administration is threatening to impose sanctions on any country which does not cut economic ties with Iran. Treasury Secretary Scott

Bessent says any country, individual, or entity that helps Tehran launder money will find itself removed from the U.S. financial system. Iran

dismissed the threat as bluster. It says the U.S. is in no position to restrict its ties with other nations.

The U.K. is giving Ukraine access to secret military technology so that it can build new long-range cruise missiles. British Prime Minister Andy

Burnham visited Ukraine as it commemorated 35 years of independence from the Soviet Union. He chaired a meeting of Ukraine's allies saying they need

to do everything they can to boost Kyiv's air defenses and quickly.

More now on the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on mail-in ballots and what exactly it means not just for the midterms but elections down the

line. Jeff Swartz is a former Florida judge and Professor Emeritus at Cooley Law School. Jeff, good to have you.

I'm going to begin with the simplest question. I thought states ran elections and now the court is at least opening the door to rules that

would give federal agencies here under the direction of the president, the Postal Service and DHS, it seems a heck of a lot of power over elections.

Is that your read?

JEFF SWARTZ, FORMER FLORIDA JUDGE: Yes, that -- well, it is to a certain degree. The -- first of all, thank you for having me. The order that came

down from the Supreme Court left open the idea and it specifically stated that if the rules that are set forth by the USPS are objectionable to them

or harmful to them they have the right to go to court and fight that.

The USPS is not technically part of the executive branch because it is an independent corporation even though the president has the right to appoint

the board of directors and the chairman of the board. There are rules that have been set forth and are now going into what we call the CFRs for

application that have been done by the USPS. I wrote two of the objections to it that were filed with the Postal Service. Now, they have to implement

it, and that's when now the standing will be with the states to move forward with their objections to the things that the USPS is trying to

accomplish by basically blackmailing them into compliance with the Homeland Security Administration.

SCIUTTO: So, I mean the court did not rule out -- well, one, it did not rule on whether the executive order is legal and it is not as one of the

justices noticed it noted foreclosed states from challenging the order going forward.

SWARTZ: Correct.

SCIUTTO: So, there is still -- is there a likelihood that the court has to make a judgment on the merits?

SWARTZ: Sooner or later they may have to, and it depends on how long it takes to get these lawsuits, which are going to be coming down the pike,

three of which have already been filed, one injunction has already been issued regarding the new CFRs, which have placed certain barcodes on the

envelopes and doing things that identify voters when the mail comes through the scanning method.

But the fact of the matter is, that at this point, once they try to implement them and demand compliance that's when states like Oregon who

is100 percent mail-in voting or Colorado, which is 70-80 percent, Florida which I understand it's up to 50 to 60 percent mail-in balloting. Same

thing goes for Texas and other states are all going to come in and say, we can't come into compliance, we will not come into compliance, it hurts us

because it's making our people vote in and go into the polls, and that is harmful to us.

I cannot see a decision being made on all of this litigation that's coming in time to implement all of these restrictions for the November balloting.

There still would be attempts to do it for '28, but for '26 this is really going to be hard to do.

SCIUTTO: There is though this other possibility independent to some degree of the course decisions going forward and that's just the chaos

possibility. Justice Jackson, I mean, she referred to this saying that the government which controls the timing of proposed and final rules I'm

quoting from her dissent can easily game the system.

I mean, one can quite easily imagine a case where, you know, as you have DHS presenting these voter rolls and just say hey these 1,000 or 10,000 or

a hundred thousand voters that voted against our candidate, right, just as it happens --

SWARTZ: Right.

SCIUTTO: -- they're not legal voters. I mean -- and then you would have other core challenges. But boy, that's a pretty messy fall, isn't it?

[18:40:00]

SWARTZ: The whole bottom line is USPS should not be screening the mail. They should not be determining who is or is not eligible to vote. That's

not their job. Their job is to deliver the mail, whether it's rain, snow, sleet, whatever that phrase used to be. There's just no way that they

should be involved in this.

And I can see courts, once they try to implement this CFR, putting a stay on the top application, going to trial, having hearings, delaying all of

this through September and into October to the point where the states cannot comply. And now, the Supreme Court's going to have to decide, are we

going to disenfranchise all of the voters in Oregon? Are we going to disenfranchise 80 percent of the people in Colorado? I just cannot see them

allowing that to take place.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Or the president himself, who votes by mail. Jeff Swartz, thanks so much for joining us.

SWARTZ: Exactly. I don't know what's wrong with it, he votes that way. OK. Only his vote counts.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much for joining. Well, it wasn't long ago that President Trump declared fentanyl the main source of the opioid epidemic to

be a weapon of mass destruction. So, why are fentanyl busts in investigations way down? We'll get the details.

And I'm also going to speak to a woman who lost her brother to opioid addiction about what is working and what more can be done to keep others

from suffering the same heartbreak. Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: President Donald Trump has declared the opioid epidemic a scourge on the United States. At the start of his second term, he placed a special

focus on the illicit version of fentanyl, as opposed to the prescription version, which does have some valid and specific medical uses.

In December, the president signed an executive order describing it closer to a chemical weapon than a narcotic. The order gives fentanyl a special

and quite ominous designation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: With this historic executive order I will sign today, we're formally classifying fentanyl as a weapon of mass

destruction, which is what it is. No bomb does what this is doing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[18:45:00]

SCIUTTO: Despite those new designations, a new report from a federal watchdog agency finds that the number of fentanyl busts and investigations

by the Department of Homeland Security has actually plunged in the past year. The DHS inspector general says the department pulled many of its

agents off of fentanyl duty in order to answer President Trump's demand for a crackdown on immigration. One DHS office quoted in the report said about

99 percent of its work was now focused exclusively on immigration enforcement, leaving almost no time or resources for fentanyl

investigations.

Well, since the opioid epidemic was declared a public health emergency in 2017, it has now claimed more than half a million lives, according to KFF.

The epidemic was initially driven by heroin and prescription drugs, but is now dominated by synthetic drugs such as fentanyl, which is considerably

stronger than morphine.

As of 2023, most counterfeit opioid pills contained a deadly dose of fentanyl. Deaths have been slowly declining since the pandemic, though they

still remain at elevated levels. In 2022, KFF found that nearly one in three adults surveyed said that either they or a family member had been

addicted to opioids at some point.

Our next guest is among those one in three Americans. Stephanie Wittels Wachs lost her brother Harris to an overdose back in 2015. Harris Wittels

was an actor and a writer on the TV show, "Parks and Recreation," when he died from a heroin overdose at his Los Angeles home at the age of just 30.

Stephanie is the author of the new book, "Last Day: How to Stop Losing Our Loved Ones to the Opioid Crisis." And she joins me now. Stephanie, it's so

good to have you.

STEPHANIE WITTELS WACHS, AUTHOR, "LAST DAY": It's so good to be here. Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: I want to begin, if I can, with how this loss has moved you, because first it moved you to begin a highly successful podcast that got to

talking about these issues. And now, it's gotten you to write the book, "Last Day." Tell us how you came to this point and came to share so much,

which is which is deeply personal, with the reading public.

WACHS: Yes. You know, when my brother called me, it was March 2013. I'll never forget because it was three days before my wedding. And he told me he

was addicted to OxyContin and spending $4,000 a month on pills. I was stunned. I felt like I had been dropped in the middle of the woods at night

with no map. It was terrifying. And I was lost. I didn't know what to do or where to go or how to help him. And I remember thinking, this sounds so

serious. Why don't I have a playbook here? What am I supposed to do?

I googled rehab, I thought, OK, if I can just get him, you know, convince him to leave "Parks and Rec" for 30 days to go to rehab, he can go in and

he'll come out the other side cured, he'll be clean, you know, like a car wash. And that was my understanding of it.

And I think everyone who's been faced with this, when they lose their person to an overdose, you're obsessed with the question, what could I have

done differently? What did I miss? And that's what led me ultimately to create the podcast and to spend the last seven years of my life researching

doggedly, you know, the answer to that question.

SCIUTTO: I want to get to some of the misconceptions that you identify about rehab. But before I do, because one clear goal of yours, it strikes

me as to take the shame out of addressing addiction. You write in your book that stigma kills people, it keeps them hidden. It keeps them from being

able to reach out for the things they need to stay alive. It makes them hide from their families. So, we have to stop stigmatizing people for using

drugs. Tell us how we do that.

WACHS: Yes. You know, the more and more I've become steeped in this work, the more I embrace the principles of harm reduction. And that really boils

down to unconditional love and radical acceptance. The fact is that people only change when change makes sense to them. And you were just talking

about the fentanyl epidemic and how scary it is and how toxic the drug supply is.

And so, our one and only job in the interim as family members for people we love who are struggling with an opioid use disorder is to keep them safe

and alive. That's it. That means staying connected, not casting people aside, not ultimating them out of your life. It means stocking up on

naloxone or Narcan, which I have right here.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

WACHS: It's really, really important. You can get it over the counter at any pharmacy without a prescription. It's in vending machines in many

college towns.

[18:50:00]

And of course, like you just said, de-stigmatizing drug use so that people are less prone to using alone. The important thing to note with Narcan is

that you cannot Narcan yourself. If you overdose, if you go into respiratory depression, this is what happened to my brother. He did a

comedy show at his favorite club. He came home, he used alone and he died and no one was there to revive him.

So, I think it's hard for us culturally to accept that people we love are doing something that we deem harmful. That makes sense, right? But

ultimately, keeping people safe is the way. And so, if somebody can tell you that they are going to use or call a safe, you know, overdose detection

hotline like SafeSpot, these are harm reduction strategies and tools we can use to keep our loved ones safe.

SCIUTTO: Narcan is so essential, and particularly if you have young people in your family, because sometimes they don't know, right, when they're

exposed to this stuff. Tell us, just if you can, about the myth of the 30- day drug rehab solution or this idea that you need to hit rock bottom. I mean, those are myths really that you address.

WACHS: Totally. This is what I thought. Obviously, most of us do. What I've learned since is that my brother had a disease, right? And this

disease was called opioid use disorder. He wasn't just making bad choices. It had nothing to do with willpower or lack thereof. Opioid use disorder is

a chronic illness that warrants medical treatment under the supervision of a doctor who specializes in addiction medicine.

30-day rehabs are great if you want to go. That is the tip of the iceberg. I talked to many brilliant addiction specialists researching this book, and

time and time again, they told me that it takes five years or 1,825 days for someone's risk of relapse to get to that of the general population. So,

that is a lot of 30-day programs, right?

SCIUTTO: Yes.

WACHS: It's never going to be enough, and we have to think about it in the same way. You would never give somebody with diabetes insulin for 30 days

and say, poof, you're cured.

SCIUTTO: Yes, yes.

WACHS: We have to be treating this within a disease framework. And so, you know, there are, like we talked about Narcan, there are also medications

for opioid use disorder that are FDA-approved, evidence-based treatment options. And so, I just want people to know that these things exist and the

30-day myth.

In fact, we just talked about the Narcan of it all. It's kind of dangerous. In fact, if you go to a program for 30 days, you come out, your tolerance

is down. You use again, and then your risk of overdose is quite high.

SCIUTTO: Well, the book is "Last Day: How to Stop Losing Our Loved Ones to the Opioid Crisis." Stephanie Wittels Wachs, we appreciate you joining.

WACHS: Thanks so much for having me. I appreciate it.

SCIUTTO: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:55:00]

SCIUTTO: Finally, tonight, Erling Haaland has debuted a surprising new hairstyle. The Norwegian football star gained fame during the World Cup for

his skills on the pitch and his long blonde hair. But apparently, he decided he needed this new look for a new season with Manchester City.

Haaland shared this video and pictures of his new style on social media. Like Sampson, he cut it all off.

Thanks so much for joining. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END