State of Emergency in L.A.
40:42 Share

It is Wednesday, June 11th. Here's what's happening right now on CNN This Morning. We reached a tipping point and declared a state of emergency. Mass arrests overnight in Los Angeles. Parts of downtown remain under a curfew at this hour as immigration protests continue. Plus... Since you have refused to leave the roadway, you will be placed under arrest. Tensions flaring across the U.S., the National Guard being deployed to other cities as those protests grow. And... Democracy is under assault before our eyes.

Strong words from California's governor calling on Americans to stand up to the Trump administration as the state is denied its emergency request to remove the National Guard.

And good morning. Thanks for joining me today. It is 6 a.m. here on the East Coast. A beautiful look at New York City this morning. America Hill in for Audie Cornish today. Thanks so much for starting your day with me. A curfew is still in place at this hour in downtown Los Angeles. That came, of course, after five days of unrest and clashes with police. Mayor Karen Bass announcing that 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew for part of downtown Los Angeles. It should last for several days. The LAPD announcing mass arrests made overnight.

So this was the scene before darkness set in in some areas on Tuesday. Nearly 200 people were told have been detained. We're not scared of Trump. We're not scared of ICE. And we're going to stay out here to defend our immigrant community. On the ground, on the ground. Protests, meantime, are popping up in other areas of the country. Hundreds of New Yorkers demonstrating near a government building in lower Manhattan. That building houses federal immigration offices and the city's main immigration court.

Those scenes there from Chicago, thousands marching through downtown in the Windy City to protest the Trump administration's on-growing immigration rates. And it's not just those cities. Demonstrations in Seattle last night, Denver, Philadelphia, Atlanta and Washington, D.C.

The government is going to be as fascist as it can be to oppress the people it's trying to exclude from this country. And we can't be afraid. We have to come out, we have to do something, and we have to help the people around us.

New this morning, members of the Texas National Guard also set to be deployed ahead of planned protests in that state this week. Joining me to discuss CNN senior national security analyst Juliette Keim. Juliette, always good to see you. So let's start first with Los Angeles. The mayor, Karen Bass, calling the administration's moves in her city a, quote, experiment for the rest of the country. Are you seeing evidence of that?

I think, well, the evidence is coming from the Trump administration. It has long viewed, certainly in terms of what you hear from Steve Miller, the deputy chief of staff, Holman, the head of immigration, that they view protests against ICE, against these major raids, as sort of a trigger for

for the kind of military action that we saw in California. So yes, I think anyone looking objectively of what's happening in California has to view it as a trial run for future deployments or federalization of the National Guard. LA just ended up being very ripe for this .

a variety of reasons. You've also noted that both the president and other members of the administration are using very specific language, touching a bit on what you just said, to protect them in future legal battles. How much of that do you see also as an effort to sort of maybe shape the rules or even try to shape the rule of law in their favor? Yeah. I

I think it is. I think what you're seeing is the by the administration is a standard of description of what's going on in Los Angeles that sort of, you know, is is, I would say, exaggerated in terms of taking over the country. California wouldn't exist. Insurrection, incitement, war, all of this language to describe what is essentially right is is unruly,

violent rioters at times who are part of a larger peaceful protest against part of these ICE raids. So the question isn't, are there bad things going on in Los Angeles? Yes. I mean, yes, you see it. There are burning cars. There is unruliness. There is looting.

Is that supposed to be dealt with with a federalized military or in a civil society with police officers and firefighters and state police? And that is the debate. The White House wants it to be a debate about immigration. Governor Newsom, as we heard last night in his speech, says this is a debate about power.

and federalism and the military in American society. And I have come to believe that Newsom is probably right in that regard. When you look at the street in Los Angeles, I'm from Los Angeles. Yes, it's bad. It's a big city. The city is not falling apart. It is having a public safety problem. Yeah, the city is not burning, despite what the president may claim. When you look at this-

Right. And you put this through a historic lens. I know you've written about this, too. What do we know? Right. What does history tell us about federalizing the National Guard sending in troops? Yeah, I'm so glad you asked that because I looked back at the at the L.A. riots and when Governor Wilson, then a Republican, asked for the federalization of the National Guard. So already you have a distinction because, as we know, Governor Newsom did not ask for it. That's what makes this

So unique. And the studies around that deployment are really not in favor of the White House's argument that only the Federalized National Guard can bring about safety and security. It turns out that the Federalized National Guard, they're not part of a known command structure. They haven't trained with local law enforcement. Communications go down. Things are actually delayed. They don't speed up.

and you always have the risk of with the sort of lack of rules of engagement that something could go wrong. I think you're kind of seeing, I mean, you're kind of seeing that in Los Angeles to the extent that

Donald Trump says these big numbers, but when you in terms of what the deployment is, but when you look out in this, it's a it's a couple hundred. They're not prepared for them. The San Francisco Chronicle is saying they being the Pentagon is not prepared for this deployment, saying that that troop members are sleeping on the on the floor outside. They don't even have beds for them. If you can't house your military, how?

is it going to be ready for any kind of effective law enforcement in civil society? Look, protest is still allowed in this country. Protest even against federal action is allowed. One cannot disrupt federal law enforcement actions, but one can certainly be angry about them as we're seeing on the street in Los Angeles. That that would rise to the level of military action is the historic change by this

No check. I don't see a check, right? In other words, when would this stop? And I think that's what Governor Newsom was talking about. Juliette Kayyem, always appreciate your insight and your expertise. Thank you. Thank you.

Coming up on CNN This Morning, the blame game. California's governor and President Trump accusing one another of escalating the situation in Los Angeles. So who's right? Plus, protecting your private information. Dozens of states now suing 23andMe as the company prepares for a sale. And have new laws actually made it more difficult for Americans to protest peacefully?

Unfortunately, some people take it up to that level. Not everybody wants that. We don't want that. We just want to make our presence known that we're here for our equal rights. Gavin Newsom offering a blunt warning for his state of California and beyond in response to the Trump administration's deployment of troops to Los Angeles and also the president's threats to arrest the governor himself. This is about all of us. This is about you.

California may be first, but it clearly will not end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next. Democracy is under assault before our eyes. This moment we have feared has arrived. Newsom's remarks coming in the wake of a federal judge denying his request to stop the deployment of National Guard troops to L.A. without his approval.

These are the men and women trained for foreign combat, not domestic law enforcement. We honor their service. We honor their bravery. But we do not want our streets militarized by our own armed forces. Not in LA, not in California, not anywhere.

The situation in California is yet another test for a Democratic Party still grappling with how to take on Donald Trump and specifically how to address immigration. Joining me to discuss Sabrina Rodriguez, national political reporter at The Washington Post, Charlie Dent, former Pennsylvania congressman, and Jaime Moore, former DNC official. It's good to see all of you this morning. As we look at where things stand in this moment, even The Wall Street Journal referring to Gavin Newsom as the leader of the opposition.

I'm curious, as we look at this time, do you think Newsom is meeting the moment here? Is he the person to push back against Donald Trump effectively? Is that a question to me? No, Charlie, it wasn't, but I'm going to bring you in after. I hope that was for you.

Look, I mean, look, I think regardless of what people say, he is the governor of California and California is on the hot seat right now. So I think for, you know, Gavin Newsom, Governor Newsom sees this as an opportunity for him to be the guy who is the anti-Trump, the guy who is the leader of the Democratic Party. And so I think for a lot of Democrats, a lot of independents,

I think they're sick of hearing the politics of it all. They're sick of hearing who's going to be the leader, who's going to be the voice. I think they want effective leadership. This is real life stuff. Immigration, particularly in California right now, is real life. So I think Democrats, instead of looking for a fighter, they want to have a leader who's going to move things forward, not get into petty fights with the president.

And yet, Sabrina, we are seeing some of the back and forth, which is not unexpected, of course, in this moment. Senator John Fetterman saying that Democrats are losing the moral high ground, in his view, when they don't contend violence amid protests in Los Angeles. Then you have the pushback from Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez saying she's calling out ISIS, quote, consistently illegal activity and accusing the president of invoking a chaotic situation for political gain. There is never going to be just one voice here.

Is there evidence that Democrats, though, Sabrina, are able to coalesce around a message in this moment? I mean, that's the ongoing struggle for Democrats right now. You know, you see President Trump. This is a fight that he has been itching to have, you know, since he was on the campaign trail last year. You know, he has long targeted, you know, Democratic state governors, particularly Gavin Newsom in California.

on the issue of immigration and crime on the campaign trail. Those are two that he spoke about very much. And they're two that polling show Democrats have really struggled with in the last year, and especially with the way that Trump talked about it on the campaign trail and really ramped up voters around this message that he was going to bring law and order and this message that he was going to crack down on immigration. Now it's sort of been hit with reality and you see these competing narratives, you know.

Based off of social media just looking at the difference between you know the commentary that's happening on X while you see what's happening on the more liberal platform blue sky I mean there's two very dueling messages about what is happening in Los Angeles right now and I think Democrats are grappling with the reality that a lot of folks at home are seeing images of Disorder even if these demonstrations are largely peaceful. How do you talk about it in a way where you focus on the?

you know, condemning violence. You focus on parts of the immigration message that you disagree with. It just puts Democrats really in a defensive position that they've really struggled with. And there's also, Charlie, when we look at this, I thought Juliet put it, I'm not sure if you all could hear Juliette Kayyem at the top of the show, but she talked about, you know, Gavin Newsom is also talking about this message of immigration, right? And that's what you're seeing from the protesters. This is about immigration coming from the Trump side as she sees it. This is a message about power.

power. How do you square those two, Charlie, in a way that's effective if you are, in fact, looking to push back about the way President Trump is using his power? Well, first, we have to distinguish that, you know, these ICE officers who are doing these raids, it's OK to protest the

But ICE is not the enemy. What these protesters are upset with is the policy that is directing ICE. So we have to separate this out. So when people are throwing objects at ICE officers, they're throwing things at law enforcement, people who are simply doing their jobs. You might not like the job they're doing, but they're doing their jobs. And I feel like watching all this that maybe Gavin Newsom should have gotten out in front of this

earlier. Why not just mobilize the National Guard? I agree that bringing in the Marines is overkill, it's wrong, posi comitatus would be a huge issue here. But why not get out in front of this? Because I think what Donald Trump wants, he wants to create this inflammatory situation. He sees the 2020 riots all over again. And frankly, that actually helped him. He nearly won reelection in part because of those riots.

And so I think in many respects that Trump sees 2020 and he wants to look strong. He wants the Democratic governors and mayors to look weak, that they won't mobilize the National Guard. And like I said, I think it's OK to mobilize the National Guard. You don't have to necessarily deploy them, but you can have them at the ready and try to preempt Donald Trump. I don't think this is a very smart move on behalf of Gavin Newsom right now.

right now. When we look at what we're hearing from voices on Capitol Hill, Gavin Newsom also calling out Congress, saying they've abdicated, saying Speaker Johnson's abdicated his duties. It was interesting, Senator Susan Collins of Maine telling CNN, I'm quoting her here, active duty forces are generally not to be involved in domestic law enforcement operations. Sabrina, is there an expectation based on some of your sources, folks that you're speaking to, that we will hear from more Republicans weighing in on this?

Right now, what we've seen from Republicans is largely co-signing what the president is doing because of the images that are coming out of Los Angeles and them sort of signing on to the messaging that, you know, order needs to be placed in Los Angeles, that it is out of control, that, you know, the mayor, Karen Bass, that Governor Newsom are not, you know,

getting things under control, and that's why President Trump had to step in. Some are clearly, you know, avoiding just talking about it, but largely it doesn't seem that we're going to hear much pushback from Republicans against the president on this front.

Group chat. Stay with me. Lots more to discuss a bit later. Also ahead here on CNN this morning is a deal on the horizon. The U.S. and China announcing a framework for trade discussion. So what's it actually change? Plus, we are live in Los Angeles as we continue to follow the developments overnight. Multiple arrests made parts of the city under a curfew lockdown. What is the situation on the ground?

And a very good morning to our friends in Miami. A beautiful shot there. Sun coming up, the sky brightening. Hope your day is as well. Stick around.

Good Wednesday morning. I'm Erica Hill in for Audie Cornish. Nice to have you here on CNN this morning. It is 6:31 here on the East Coast. Here's a quick look at what's happening right now. Numerous arrests in Los Angeles overnight, according to the LAPD, after protesters refused to leave parts of downtown, which are now under a curfew. That curfew is set to remain in place until 6:00 a.m. local time and should be there for several days, according to the mayor.

In a matter of hours, the Federal Appeals Court is set to hear arguments on President Trump's request to erase his hush money conviction. Two lower courts have already denied that request. Last year, of course, Trump was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records to conceal payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels.

Well, we now know who was going to be facing off in the New Jersey governor's race. Democrat Mikey Sherrill and Trump-backed Republican Jack Chiarelli winning their respective primaries last night. That election, of course, is set for November.

Turning our attention back to California, the city of Los Angeles declaring a state of emergency after days of immigration protests have rocked pockets of the city. A one-mile radius of downtown is now under a curfew. In that area, City Hall, the main county courthouse, and federal buildings, which have been the target for these protests. On Tuesday, the mayor was quick to clear up, though, the scope of these demonstrations.

It is extremely important to know that what is happening in this one square mile is not affecting the city. Some of the imagery of the protests and the violence gives the appearance as though this is a citywide crisis, and it is not. CNN's Maribel Gonzalez is in downtown Los Angeles.

Parts of the downtown Los Angeles area, including where we're standing right now, are currently under curfew. That curfew began at 8 p.m. local time last night in Los Angeles Police Department, making mass arrests following that emergency order.

Thousands are taking to the streets across the country to protest immigration and customs enforcement. The epicenter is in Los Angeles. City officials say the vast majority of demonstrators here are following the law. When these peaceful rallies end and the protesters head home, another element moves in.

Officials say more than 20 L.A. businesses have been looted and a small part of the city had a curfew Tuesday night. I would appeal to the president to stop the ICE raids so that we can have stability in our city. National Guard members are in L.A. against the governor's wishes. A U.S. official says hundreds of Marines the president mobilized

have been briefed on rules for use of force on American soil. We do not want our streets militarized by our own armed forces, not in L.A., not in California, not anywhere. Other demonstrations have been in Washington, Boston, Atlanta, Denver, Milwaukee, San Francisco, New York, Chicago, and more. The White House says undocumented immigrants broke the law by entering the U.S. illegally. Demonstrators say ICE,

shouldn't go after those who are otherwise law abiding. Now that curfew will extend until 6 a.m. local time. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass says the curfew order will be in effect at least for a few days. Now as far as the Marines deployed to the area, we're told they are standing by outside of Los Angeles awaiting orders. Reporting in downtown Los Angeles, I'm Maribel Gonzalez.

So as we're monitoring not only what's happening in L.A., but different protests that are popping up around the country, there are also questions about new state laws and whether they could actually make it more difficult for people to protest peacefully. Joining me now to dig in is Kathleen Bartzen Culver, journalism professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Kathleen, it's great to have you here. So you co-authored a piece looking at

the impact of these laws that were both passed and proposed, really how they were presented. And these all popped up in the wake of protests following the murder of George Floyd in December of—in 2020, of course. The measures were ostensibly to prevent riots at demonstrations. What did you find in terms of how they impact Americans' abilities to protest peacefully?

Well, thank you so much for having me. I appreciate the opportunity. I am convinced that our biggest concern here is that people will be afraid to protest. So the study that my colleague Doug McLeod and I did was looking at the longstanding protest paradigm, which examines news media coverage of protest.

And these bills were framed as anti-riot bills, but what they actually were were anti-protest bills. In the case of Florida, for instance, people who participated peacefully in a protest could be arrested if anyone else was acting outside of the law. And that was a big problem. Thankfully, that's been suspended by the Florida Supreme Court.

There's also, as you noted, you and your co-author, your colleague in this study, were looking at the media coverage of these laws as well. One of the big challenges, I think, as we all know in this moment, is how people choose to inform themselves, how and where they choose to get their information, and how that then informs their view of what's happening on the ground. How is that complicating what Americans may or may not know about their rights to protest in this moment? Well, I think there

- Well, I think there are a couple of things at play here. So one is about choice. So right now we have unprecedented ability to be in information bubbles, to choose sources that align with our viewpoints. And when we choose those sources, we can be misinformed. But the other piece is how you and your colleagues in the news media present protest.

If you ask the average person for their take on the 2020 protests, many of them, if maybe most of them, will say that those were violent protests, that there were riots. Really, that was only about 6% of all of the protest activity in summer of 2020 involved violence of any kind, right down to, you know, spray painting graffiti. So as news media present violence as the norm, people come to believe that that is the norm.

And those are practices that have to change. Have you started to see a shift at all over the last five years? Somewhat of a shift. So I did notice actually in the package leading into me that there was less content related specifically to the issues that protesters are out in the streets to seek redress for. It is their constitutional right to do that.

And I think overall we're seeing more issues coverage, but when it comes to breaking news, we're seeing a lot of what we have seen in 2020 and before. So what is your conversation then with your students, right? I'm thinking of the future journalists who are, you know, right now learning from you, learning from your colleagues. What is your message to them in terms of getting it right in your view?

So my message to them is that they look at their coverage as a whole. So for instance, if they're working for an outlet that is big into breaking news and presents news 24/7, what are they doing to present the issues on an hourly basis as opposed to just the coverage of the protests? Especially if the protests turn violent, how balanced is that? So if in 2020, 94% of protests were peaceful, then 94% of news content

should have shown those peaceful protests. And I will say, protesters are in a double bind here. So they only get, not only, but they often are most likely to get coverage when things do turn to law breaking, so graffiti, car fires, etc., which many do not want to engage in. So they'll get the coverage that they seek, but then their issues are ignored because of the focus on the law breaking.

And there's interesting, I wish we had time to dive into it, but I'd love to dive into too, maybe the next time, the social media aspect of all of this, right? How and what gets picked up and how that gets amplified, either overshadowing or, you know, getting underplayed. Kathleen, really appreciate you taking the time. Thank you. Thanks so much for having me. Well, it turns out regrets,

He's got a few. Elon Musk. Second thoughts, it appears, about all those unkind tweets he rattled off last week, calling for the president to be impeached, suggesting without evidence that the name Donald Trump appears in the unreleased Epstein files. In fact, the bromance breakup appears to be keeping Musk up at night. How do we know that?

Well, we're just looking at the timestamp here, but at 3:04 a.m., so just about three and a half hours ago this morning, the Tesla CEO posting, "As you see here, I regret some of my posts about President Donald Trump last week. They went too far." The group chat is back. That is probably like the most perfect response you could have from one of your kids when they realize they messed up, like, "Oh, hey, I went too far." Charlie, what do you make of that?

Oh, of course he has to have regrets, not just about the tweets, but about the whole Doge process. Remember how this started off. He said he was going to find $2 trillion in savings. Then they shaved it down to $1 trillion, and they said, oh, we're not going to look at Social Security and Medicare and all the big areas where the federal government spends money. And then they talk about bringing out wood chippers, and there's the chainsaw.

and the images of the wealthiest man in the world then denying food assistance and medical assistance to some of the most desperately poor people in the world, then you wonder why people don't want to buy your cars. So I think he probably has a few regrets well beyond his latest fight with Donald Trump. So he's got a lot to think about.

Sabrina, we do know the president likes it when people kiss the ring, right, and come back. Is this enough for them to make up? Potentially. I think a lot of folks, you know, in the last week since the feud started to come out into the public have sort of speculated that there would be some smoothing over, you know, eventually, you know, the

Trump likes Elon Musk. That's the reality. They spent the last year, you know, spending so much time together. He entrusted Elon Musk with this project of the Department of Government Efficiency. I think the president also recognizes the optics here, recognizes that Elon Musk is deeply unpopular, recognizes

You know what Charlie was just saying about the fact that, you know, there was a big over promise here and and the optics of Elon Musk coming out with the chainsaw and all of that did not help him. So I think, you know, it might take more than this, but it's certainly a step forward, especially for it to be happening so publicly on X at three in the morning and something that folks like us are going to be talking about this morning. I think the president will certainly register this effort.

Jaime, do Democrats do anything with this or do they just let it lie? Look, I think Democrats were much more happy last week when we were talking about Donald Trump and Elon Musk. So I think Democrats are going to use this as fodder for as long as possible. I do think there are other individuals in the Trump administration that Democrats will start sort of teasing out a little bit as a little bit more adversarial and opposition. And so, look, I don't know how this is going to go, but I do think Democrats would much prefer to talk about this than talk about what's happening in L.A. and around the country.

Yes, that I think most would agree with. All right, group chat, stay with me. Much more to cover ahead. Right here on CNN This Morning, President Trump sending, of course, active military troops to Los Angeles, which raises a question about why he did not make that same decision on January 6th when violent protesters stormed the U.S. Capitol. Plus, opening night at the Kennedy Center, President Trump and Vice President Vance will both be in attendance. What else can you expect?

The community is definitely being broken up. You see children crying for their parents because they're being separated from them. It's scary for the children because where are the children going to be? What if they don't have anybody else but them?

There are a lot of questions. There is a lot of uncertainty in this moment and specifically in a number of immigrant communities. President Trump enjoyed broad support, of course, when it comes to immigration and his pledge that he would handle it. Those pledges coming during the 2024 election. Is there, though, some buyer's remorse?

They want our immigrant community to be scared to go to their court hearings. And they want people to stay at home where they can more easily be detained in absentia. So it's critically important that we empower our immigrant neighbors and our immigrant family to keep coming out to their court dates and their court hearings.

I'm joined now by Rev. Dr. Gabriel Salguero, who's president and founder of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition. Reverend, it's nice to have you with us this morning. As we take a step back and we look at what's happening, there's so much attention on what's happening in Los Angeles. A number of these protests began, of course, as a reaction to what people on the ground saw as overly aggressive ICE actions. Do you share any of those concerns in the way that the administration is going about some of these immigration raids and roundups?

Well, there's really two questions here, Erica, and thank you for having me this morning. Number one is I do share the concerns. I think that in many of our churches, the administration and its surrogates said we would only focus on violent criminals. And now we see that many of our people, some of them going to churches and some of the parents and small business owners are being detained here.

at their immigration hearings or when they go to court. I got two calls this week, one yesterday, where a woman who's been in church for 20 years, a small group leader, was detained after going to a hearing. A guitar player who's a worship leader in one of the churches in Tampa was detained, and he and his wife are on a list to be deported. No violent criminal history. And so there's one. The second thing is the protest. We feel that people should exercise their constitutional right

to civil protest while at the same time abstaining from violence or from vandalism, which I heard in an earlier report is only 6%. And so most people are doing that, but to those other 6% who are not, we're asking them to restrain from violence or vandalism while protesting how these immigration actions are being enforced.

You know, and just to clear up for our viewers who may not have been with us earlier in the hours, you know, we were speaking with a professor from the University of Wisconsin who noted that her research showing that 6 percent of the protests in the wake of the murder of George Floyd were violent or involved some sort of violence. So that was the number she was referring to. But you make an important point, right, that I've heard from my colleagues there on the ground, that we've heard from local officials.

in Los Angeles and that these are small pockets and that overwhelmingly these have been peaceful protests. When we look at immigration, there is no denying this is a broad, is a complex problem. If it was not, it would have been solved decades ago. It has not. Do you feel the Trump administration, though, is addressing it in a way that is actually going to result in meaningful change? Meaning, are they directly addressing the issues? I know you note some of the concern you've had, you know, from your congregants and from others you've spoken with about

perhaps not doing exactly what they said they would do and going solely after violent criminals. - Look, we support that violent criminal immigrants be processed and deported. What we don't support

is this action against even legal immigrants with the canceling of temporary protected status, with even defending against birthright citizenship. And so many evangelicals were told that this was a focus on violent criminals. But the truth is,

If you look at what's happening, that is not what's happening. Although some violent criminals are being processed and detained, we're talking about family members. We're talking about fathers and mothers and small business owners and people who are on our worship teams. And so I, for one, am really disconcerted for those who are saying that they're only doing that when the truth on the ground is not that.

You are in Washington to push for support of some existing social safety net programs, right? And what may or may not happen to them in terms of the quote, big, beautiful bill. I know you have a number of meetings lined up for today. That is your focus. But how much do you anticipate that immigration and some of the concerns that you've just raised will also come up in conversation? How important is it to you to make sure that it's part of the conversation with lawmakers? Look, the reality is that as a pastor and as a follower of Jesus,

I am called to speak up for poor, hungry, vulnerable people, whoever they are.

and wherever they live. And so I imagine that my pastoral vocation and the several hundred pastors and faith leaders that are in Washington, D.C. will raise not just the protection of the social safety net of WIC and SNAP and CTC for poor people, but also the rights and dignities of our immigrant neighbors. They were created in the image and likeness of God. And, you know, for a long time, many candidates say they're pro-family and pro-children.

And one of the ways you can show that you're pro-family and pro-children is by defending immigrant children and immigrant families, and at the same time, standing up for those social safety nets that help poor children and poor families. I, for one, am concerned that we've lost nuance on what it means to be holistically pro-family and pro-children. You talk about your faith and obviously how that drives you.

and the Christian faith and what it means. You are also, as I noted, you're the founder of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition. What does it mean to use your voice in this moment as well as a Latino? How does that change the conversation, you think?

Look, I think that when I say I'm an evangelical, there are a lot of assumptions that I belong to a certain political party. When I say that I'm Latino, there are assumptions that I belong to another political party. I am both Latino and evangelical. And I'm hoping that as a Latino evangelical leader, we are able to reinsert into the public sphere the word nuance and the word commonality.

compromise and the word solutionist, that instead of using topics like poverty and immigration as a political ping pong, Congress and the administration and the Senate get their act together to provide solutions rather than attacking one another. Solutions would be lovely and fewer attacks as well. Best of luck in your conversations today, Reverend. Thanks for your time this morning. Thank you. Have a good day. You too.

54 minutes past the hour now. Here's your morning roundup. A mass shooting at an Austrian high school, leaving 10 people dead, including the shooter, the suspect, a 21-year-old former student of the school. The motive at this hour is unclear. Police do believe, though, that he acted alone. This attack is considered the worst rampage in Austria's history.

Today, an alleged victim who has only been identified by the name Jane is back on the stand for continued cross-examination in Sean Diddy Combs' trial. The judge recently ruled against Combs' second request for a mistrial after his legal team refiled accusing a witness of false testimony.

President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance is set to attend the sold-out opening show of Les Mis at the Kennedy Center tonight. This follows, of course, Trump taking over as board chair in February. The center announced the institution will be closed to the public due to enhanced security protocols. Insurrection, protest, assault. If you'll recall, if we look back to January 6th, those words were used to describe what happened on that day. They're also being used to discuss what's happening in Los Angeles.

I could tell you there were certain areas of that of Los Angeles that you could have called it an insurrection. It was terrible. But these are paid insurrectionists. These are paid troublemakers. Important to note, we have no evidence that anyone has been paid to be there with the National Guard and troop mobilization. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is noting the disconnect between how the president is behaving now and how he behaved in January on January 6th. On January 6th,

with violence against the Constitution, against the Congress, and against the United States Capitol, we begged the President of the United States to send in the National Guard. He would not do it. Contra-constitutional way, he has sent the National Guard into California. Something is very wrong with this picture.

The group chat is back. Is this an effective messaging strategy, Jaime, for Dems to create this equivalency? Look, I mean, I think the former speaker is absolutely correct. President Trump is noticeably speaking differently this week than he did during January 6, 2021. So I think Democrats are trying to figure out a way to attack this issue and other issues at all corners.

And so Speaker Pelosi, who's been a prolific messenger and someone who has carried the Democrats for so long, I think she's trying to right this ship again. She understands how to talk to people, particularly those in California and around the country. And so I think this could be an effective message. I do think people want our president to be fair. I do think people want our president to treat people equal, regardless of their status, particularly if they are Americans. And so I think she's right. Charlie, what's your take?

Yeah, I think her argument is actually pretty effective pointing out the hypocrisy. I think it's better than what Gavin Newsom is doing that and she can just make the case that Trump is playing politics and is needlessly inciting and inflaming this situation. So I think that's a better argument than what Gavin Newsom has been doing when he probably should have tried to get out in front of Trump and maybe just immobilize the guard just to prevent

prevent this argument from happening in the first place. Sabrina, could it have some staying power in Washington in that conversation?

Potentially. I mean, four years later, we still see the potent imagery of January 6th. So this is a way of sort of reinserting it in the conversation. And it's sort of a reminder of how President Trump treats people that support him versus his opponents. And that's what's playing out in California right now. All right. Before I let you all go, a quick round of what you're keeping an eye on. Sabrina, I'm going to go to you first on this one.

Right now, given everything that's happening in California, I'm keeping an eye tomorrow. There's going to be a big hearing on Capitol Hill with three Democratic governors, including Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, both who are considered potential 2028 contenders. They're going to be talking about immigration. So I think it'll be really interesting how they grapple with it at this moment that Newsom is facing the attacks in California. Hyma?

Erica, we know this AI conversation is just getting started. It's getting bigger by the day. So Ohio State University just announced this week that they're going to start a literacy program for all their students beginning with the new freshman class. And so they will require all students to take an AI fluency course. And so this is par for the course. I think we'll see this across universities and colleges in the coming months.

That's a good one. Learning how to use it, right? Charlie, what about you? I'm watching the Senate reconciliation process and waiting for them to release their version of the big, beautiful bill. And I'm suspecting that they're not going to meet the July 4th deadline right now. There is a chance. It's good to be with all of you. Always a pleasure to keep Audie's seat warm. I'm glad I could be here with you this morning. Thanks, everyone, for waking up with us. I'm keeping my eye on a little basketball game that's going to be happening.

I'm Erica Hill in for Audie Cornish on this Wednesday. Stay with us. CNN News Central starts right now.