Deep Dive
Shownotes Transcript
Have you ever spotted McDonald's hot, crispy fries right as they're being scooped into the carton? And time just stands still. I'm Shannon Bream. The Senate works the weekend to confirm key members of President Trump's national security team, while the new president lays the groundwork for his most ambitious policies yet.
We've accomplished more in one week than other administrations have accomplished in four years. President Trump hits the ground running with an aggressive agenda and major changes, both at home and abroad, as two of the president's most critical cabinet picks are confirmed. Pete Higgs got approved. And Kristi Noem just got approved. Governor, she's going to keep it.
Tom Cotton, now the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, joins us live. As another key Trump nominee prepares for a make-or-break week in front of the Intelligence Committee, he now leaves. Plus, four more hostages released from Hamas captivity as the ceasefire agreement enters a second week. Senator Richard Blumenthal joins us exclusively on the state of the fragile deal and the impact of the new president's vision for the region then.
This is about ensuring the citizenship, a cornerstone of our national identity. This executive order is not only going to be burdensome, it's unconstitutional. Border security and the fight over birthright citizenship. We'll look at the legal challenges and how it might play out in our nation's highest courts. All right now on Fox News Sunday.
Hello from Fox News in Washington. We began with a look at some of your top headlines. Much needed rain is falling in Southern California today, aiding firefighters as they try to prevent another major flare up. But there are worries that heavy rain over the next few days could trigger mudslides in charred, dry neighborhoods.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas swore in Kristi Noem as Homeland Security Secretary late Saturday. She resigned as North Dakota's governor upon her Senate confirmation, succeeded then by Lieutenant Governor Larry Roden. And in Israel, four more hostages are back home this weekend from Hamas captivity in Gaza after an exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. In a moment, we're going to get reaction from Senators Tom Cotton and Richard Blumenthal. But first, we turn to Fox News Chief Foreign Correspondent Trey Yinks there on the ground in Israel. Hello, Trey.
Shannon, good morning. After 477 days of waiting, four Israeli hostages were released from Hamas captivity on Saturday morning. The women were paraded through Gaza City across the stage before they were taken into the custody of the Red Cross. Emotional moments as the Israeli soldiers reunited with their family members
along the Gaza border before being flown to a hospital in central Israel. The exchange was the second of phase one in this ceasefire agreement and also included the release of nearly 200 Palestinian prisoners. Some of those prisoners were released into waiting crowds in the West Bank city of Ramallah, while dozens more of the violent offenders were exiled into Egypt.
The current ceasefire deal is in jeopardy as the Israelis wait for a list of remaining hostages set to be freed in the first round of the deal and then released for other civilians that are being held inside Gaza, including one female from the community of Nero's believed to be alive. In response, Israel has reportedly paused the ability for Palestinians to return to northern Gaza from the south, a key part of the agreement. Yesterday, President Trump said he is asking Egypt and Jordan to open their borders to allow Palestinians to go there
while Gaza is being cleared of Hamas and rebuilt. Trump left open the idea that this could be a temporary or long-term solution. The statement drew reactions in Gaza. ARIZON BAKER : The call by the U.S. president, Donald Trump, is completely rejected, completely, completely. If he thinks he will forcefully displace the Palestinian people, this is impossible, impossible, impossible. The Palestinian people firmly believe that this land is theirs. This soil is their soil.
There is hope that the current agreement could lead to a broader peace across the region ushered in by President Trump and his team, but the new administration faces an uphill battle. Shannon. Trey Yang's live in Israel. Trey, thank you. And now to Fox News correspondent Lucas Tomlinson covering the president's trip out west.
Shannon, President Trump returned to Nevada, one of the states he won in his seven swing state sweep. Here in Las Vegas, home to some of the largest hotels in the world, the president had a message for his supporters in the service industry. He wants to scrap their taxes on tips. We're going to have no tax on tips from now on. Many of these workers are some of the very citizens who were hit hard and very hard by the ravages of the Biden economy, which
which was inflation. - Before arriving in Las Vegas, Trump's first stop on his first trip since returning to the White House was Western North Carolina to tour the communities ravaged by Hurricane Helene. Next, he visited Los Angeles, where California Governor Gavin Newsom unexpectedly showed up for Trump's arrival. After touring the devastation by air and on the ground, Trump thanked first responders
and later sat down with local leaders, including L.A. Mayor Karen Bass. The two sparred over letting homeowners begin repairing the damage and not waiting on government contractors, which Trump says could slow down recovery efforts. They are saying they will not be allowed to start for 18 months. No.
That will not be the case. Okay, I just hope you're right. You can hold me to it. Four groups said that. No. They should be able to start tonight. That will not be the case. Trump said he expects to sign a new executive order to overhaul FEMA or get rid of it entirely. The commander-in-chief also getting rid of 17 inspector generals, including those at the Pentagon and State Department. The response split among party lines. Sometimes inspector generals don't do the job that they are supposed to.
supposed to do. Some of them deserve to be fired. One more example of a lack of respect for rule of law. We saw it earlier when President Trump pardoned all the January 6th rioters. Now, to get rid of independent inspector generals. How is any of this going to lower grocery prices?
after pete hegseth was sworn in as defense secretary many republicans want swifter confirmations beginning with trump's pick to lead the treasury department scott besant and hearings for tulsi gabbard and rfk jr shannon all right lucas tomlinson from vegas thank you very much and joining us now arkansas senator tom cotton he's got a brand new book out by the way next month entitled seven things
You can't say about China, and Senator, we'll see if we get to any of those seven in this conversation. We're definitely going to talk about China. But I want to ask you about the reporting there that Lucas had about the firing of these inspectors general. I've talked to, I've heard of some from some of your GOP colleagues who are concerned about this saying it didn't give the proper notification, even if ultimately it would be. The notice wasn't there. And is President Trump signaling he's just going to, you know, observe which laws he wants to and not others?
Well, Shannon, time and time again, the Supreme Court has said that Congress can't impose restrictions on the president's power to remove officers. In President Trump's first term, he removed the director of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. Despite limitations on the president's constitutional power to remove officers, that was litigated at the Supreme Court, and the president won. So ultimately, these inspectors general serve the pleasure of the president. He wants new people in there. He wants people focused on getting out waste and fraud and abuse and reforming these agencies. He has a right to have
to get in there who he wants. Do you think he will? That's the next question because there have been...
Struggling with credit cards, personal loans, medical bills, or collections? It's time to stop worrying about that high-interest debt you've got piling up. PDS Debt can help you start saving money immediately. Their platform can analyze your unique situation and create a plan to get you out of debt. There's no minimum credit score required, and it takes 30 seconds to get your results. With PDS Debt, you'll take back control of your finances. Get a free debt analysis in just 30 seconds at pdsdebt.com.
been times when those inspector general slots have been left open by various presidents. Are you confident because they're your eyes and ears as lawmakers that they will be filled? I believe so. And he says he wants to fill those offices. Maybe he won't fill them immediately because there's an entire administration to staff and he may have other priorities. But I think the president's inherent power to remove officers will be upheld if it's challenged in court, as it has been time and again for Democratic and Republican presidents alike.
I want to ask you about the Middle East, former hostages home. You've been critical of this deal. You've had some concerns about it. It came together, seems like, in approach from President Biden and President Trump. Are you confident in the deal moving forward, the fact that there is progress? We are getting these people home, some of them. Well, of course we welcome home these hostages, and you can't help but be overjoyed in your heart to see families welcoming them back. At the same time, my general preference is not to negotiate with terrorists. Hamas was on its back foot.
They're not destroyed. They were almost destroyed. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we didn't negotiate with Imperial Japan. We said unconditional surrender and give us our 40,000 Americans back. Now, that said, the deal is underway. We predicted at the time that Hamas might break the terms of the deal, and that's apparently exactly what happened yesterday by not sending home Israeli civilian women
That's one reason why the Israeli government has paused the relocation of Gazans to certain areas inside of Gaza. I would say if Hamas wants to continue this ceasefire, they need to respect every single term of that deal. - Well, we're watching minute by minute as two other phases are still yet to be negotiated as well. I wanna ask you about these hearings this week. Your Senate Intel Committee that you now chair, we'll hear from Tulsi Gabbard.
the DNI nominee. She's got plenty of critics out there from both sides of the aisle. Let me read from a former chairman of the U.S. National Intelligence Council, writing that she's got no background in intelligence whatsoever and has never managed much of anything, even more worryingly as someone meant to advise the president and protect our nation's secrets from our adversaries.
Gabbard has cozied up to at least two vicious dictators who are America's enemies. There are concerns about her positions with Bashar al-Assad, Edward Snowden, her use of FISA and those tools and how she feels about them. Are you confident that you've had your questions on those issues addressed? Yeah, I've had many occasions to speak with Ms. Gabbard, as have the members of the committee and other senators. We got her background check back along with her financial papers last week. We promptly scheduled a hearing seven days later, as the rules of our committee allow. And I
I can promise you and all Americans that Tulsi Gabbard is going to have a full hearing on Thursday. It's going to be just like the hearing that we conducted for John Ratcliffe and the hearings that the committee has conducted for nominees for both Democratic and Republican presidents alike. No more, no less, no better, no worse. I understand that people have their differences of opinion with Ms. Gabbard. Probably some Republicans disagree with the vote she's cast as a Democratic congresswoman. A lot of Democrats may be upset that she finally saw the light and left the Democratic Party.
I do hope, though, that we won't see anyone questioning her patriotism. Hillary Clinton has basically called her a traitor in the past. This is a woman who served
more than 20 years in our nation's army. She's passed five different background checks. I reviewed the latest one. It's clean as a whistle. It's fine for people to have policy differences and ask questions about those differences. I hope no one would impugn Ms. Gabbard's patriotism or her integrity. There are reports in both Axios and National Review quoting GOP senators saying they think she might not even make it out of committee. I mean, are there things about
her conversations, her positions with regard to Assad or to Putin that raised any concern for you? Well, I think there's a lot of people making predictions on background about the president's nominees that don't come true. If you recall, Pete Hexseth in early December was on the verge of withdrawing and being replaced by someone, and now he's Secretary Hexseth at the Department of Defense. They've been making a lot of the similar predictions about Donald Trump.
over the last few years, and he's now staged the greatest political comeback in American history. So, again, we'll have a full and fair hearing for Ms. Gabbard on Thursday. She'll be able to explain her past statements and her votes. She'll explain, I'm sure, also that whatever her views on certain policies, programs or laws, that she will faithfully execute the president's agenda. And if she's confirmed, she'll give an unbiased and unvarnished look at the intelligence that comes in every day about the nation's threats. AMNA NAWAZ: One of those threats you have been long vocal about is China.
Let's talk about TikTok, because President Trump seems to be willing to pause the ban on TikTok and to try to work out a deal. There are different conversations and rumors about what may come together, but he's indicated he may be willing to allow some level of Chinese ownership or connection to this. And he gives this explanation to our colleague, Sean Hannity, about why.
But you can say that about everything made in China. Look, we have our telephones made in China, for the most part. We have so many things made in China. So why don't they mention that? Your response?
Well, the law that we passed last year is in effect, and the law is the law, and it imposes ruinous consequences on any company that continues to host or distribute TikTok. At this point, not just liability, but bankruptcy, because the penalties are so high that most medium-sized countries couldn't pay them. So I want to commend those companies like Apple and Google that are following the law and no longer hosting TikTok.
But our point in passing that law was never to ban TikTok in the United States. It was to force ByteDance, its parent company that is controlled by the Chinese communists, to divest from TikTok, to have a TikTok that is not influenced by Chinese communists. It's not just a threat to our privacy and data, although it certainly is that. It's a threat because it spreads propaganda like anti-Semitic.
content and pro-Hamas content. It exposes children to extreme violence, obscenity, drug use, even encouraging suicide. And it can be used as an actual tool of statecraft. As you saw when Congress passed the law, TikTok sent push notices to its users' phones, urging them to contact Congress and lobby against the law.
What might they do if Donald Trump imposes tariffs on China or in a moment of heightened tension around Taiwan? That's why it's critical that there be a complete and total break with communist China, and that's exactly what the law insists. As for a deal, I'm not really concerned about whether this American company or that American group of investors buys it, or for that matter, if we work with partners in places like Europe or the Middle East or East Asia, if it's controlled by an ally that's very different than it's controlled by communist China.
OK, I want to try to get to two quick things before you go. While we're on the subject of China, this was a headline from The New York Times yesterday. CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain COVID's origins. This was their headline in February of 2020. Senator Tom Cotton repeats fringe theory of coronavirus origins. Do you feel some level of vindication?
Well, I said from the very beginning COVID probably came from that lab. I didn't have access to classified intelligence or special scientific knowledge. I just used a little common sense and looked at the facts and understood what Chinese communists do. I'm glad that in the final days of the Biden administration, the CIA reached the same conclusion, and I commend John Ratcliffe for making that conclusion public. The important thing now is that we have to make China pay for unleashing this plague on the world, just like we have to make them pay for stealing our jobs and harming American workers and businesses by doing things like
This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Upgrade your business with Shopify, home of the number one checkout on the planet. ShopPay boosts conversions up to 50%, meaning fewer carts going abandoned and more sales going cha-ching. So if you're into growing your business, get a commerce platform that's ready to sell wherever your customers are. Visit Shopify.com to upgrade your selling today. Imposing tariffs on them, on...
strategically critical goods or passing my legislation or pill the most permanent most favored nation status. All right. Very quickly before you go, President Trump has taken back the security detail for a number of people. Anthony Fauci, Mike Pompeo, Brian Hook, among them John Bolton to the Wall Street Journal editorial board says, pray it won't happen. But what if one of them now gets attacked?
If Iran commits violence against any of these men, Mr. Trump won't be able to escape some responsibility. Yeah, I would encourage the president to revisit the decision for those people who are being targeted by Iran, as the president was targeted for assassination by Iran. As the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, I've reviewed the intelligence in the last few days. The threat to anyone involved in President Trump's strike on Qasem Soleimani is persistent. It's real. Iran is committed.
to vengeance against all of these people. In fact, the chief of staff of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence agreed with me that if these threats were against him or his family, that he would want security because the threats are real, there are gaps in our coverage, we don't know what we don't know, and it's better to be safe than sorry.
because it's not just about these men who helped President Trump carry out his policy in his first term. It's about their family and friends, innocent bystanders every time they're in public. It's also about the president being able to get good people and get good advice. If people are saying going to work for the president now on Iran or China or North Korea or the Mexican drug cartels, they might hesitate to do so. They might hesitate if they're in office to give him the advice he needs or carry out the policies that he decides upon.
Senator, thank you for your time. We'll be watching Thursday for that hearing. Thank you. All right, up next with us, joining us now, Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal. Thank you very much, Senator, for being with us today. Thank you. I want to go back to the Middle East story because I know that you've been in touch with the father of one of the Israeli-American hostages, Segi Dekelshen, who has been, we don't know his status. Do you know anything more about his condition, his status, when he may be released? All we know is that Segi Dekelshen
Deco Penn is among the 33 hostages who are on the list to be released. We're praying and working for the fulfillment of the ceasefire agreement. Senator Cotton is absolutely right. America should hold Hamas to that agreement, support Israel in insisting that every single provision, it's a bipartisan agreement. I give President Trump a lot of credit, along with
President Biden for reaching it. And we need to keep our eye on the ball because this ceasefire agreement can lead to normalization expansion of the Abraham Accords and a united front against the real adversary here, which is Iran.
I want to ask you about something you've been pretty vocal on, which has been in the headlines this week, which are these presidential pardons. You've got a couple of things, potentially a bill to introduce that would force a president to explain what and why and how they're doing this, and even talking about offering up a constitutional amendment, which would limit the ability of a president to pardon or commute some of these sentences. I want to ask you about one case in particular, because you know it well. You were Connecticut Attorney General when Adrian Peeler was convicted on both state and federal charges, sent to prison.
He was convicted in connection with the death of an eight-year-old little boy and his mom because they'd apparently been witnesses to another shooting. It changed the laws forever in Connecticut. And the fact that Adrian Peeler was commuted, his sentence by President Biden, it's being described as a miscarriage of justice, outrageous. You know the case very well. Have you gotten any indication from anyone connected to the Biden administration why he would have been commuted and will apparently be out this summer? I have no explanation. And
The decision in that case, frankly, was appalling to me. I was attorney general of the state of Connecticut at the time that Adrian Peeler was convicted of murdering a witness, an eight-year-old boy who was about to testify in a drug case. It was a miscarriage of justice. And frankly, as appalling to me as the pardons for 1,500 rioters who assaulted brutally, causing serious injuries and some deaths to police, that decision by President Trump, I think, was appalling.
equally, if not more, appalling to me. But the point here is that there have been mistakes on both sides, Democrat, Republican presidents. These decisions are made in the shadows. They're a black box. Nobody knows why that decision on Adrian Peeler was made. And many of these pardon decisions really cry out for more accountability and transparency. That's why I have introduced a bill
It's called the Pardon, Transparency and Accountability Act that would establish some guardrails in requiring a justice impact statement, notification of the victims and to the prosecutors so they can express their opinion, an explanation required of the president, disclosure of any lobbying that has occurred in connection with that pardon decision. Now, as you know, the pardon power is absolute. It's one of those rare, maybe unique powers that has no checks or balances.
the founders kind of incorporated from the English monarchy and in order to really establish some safeguards and guardrails we need a constitutional amendment so to be clear though none of the 1500 J6 people were charged with killing an officer there was definitely violence against an officer that was charged but just so we're clear on that point um there's also this issue of President Biden's pardons of his family members literally minutes before he left and President Biden was sworn in John Yoo writes about that over at Newsweek he says
It's because he fears the very lawfare that he invented. These pardons were to Biden's own benefit, as their recipients are much less likely to disclose any information that directly implicate President Biden to the family's alleged quote.
pay to play 10% for the big guy schemes. They're Democrats who've questioned the wisdom of President Biden doing that on the way out the door. Would your proposals, either of them, limit a president's ability to pardon family members? It would require the legislation that I've offered that the president provide some explanation, some accountability, some guardrails. But let's be very clear. I was critical, one of those Democrats who said to the president,
No preemptive pardons. They're not required. And they violate the basic spirit of the pardon law. And I think what we need in the legislation, as well as ultimately a constitutional amendment, is greater transparency and accountability for the president so that Congress has a role. And like my state of Connecticut, there's a board of pardons and paroles that has specific criteria.
When you check out at the pharmacy, you see the journey from idea to medicine thanks to our intellectual property system, or IP for short. IP safeguards inventions like a new way to prevent seizures or lower cholesterol. And IP supports competition from other brands. Then, lower cost generics, which are 90% of prescriptions filled in the U.S. Innovation, competition, lower costs, thanks to IP. ♪
Learn more at phrma.org/ipworkswonders. ... outside judgment and a kind of check and balance that the Constitution applies in other decisions. And while we're on the topic of transparency, just to add a note on the firing of inspectors general, Senator Cotton is absolutely right that the president has broad inherent power to fire
in the executive branch. But with respect to inspectors general, there is a specific law that requires notice, 30 days, and a statement of reasons, substantive and detailed rationale. And that law plainly has not been complied with here. I challenge my Republican colleagues
many of them strong advocates of inspectors general, Senator Ernst and Grassley, who have been powerful and eloquent advocates of these watchdogs and bulwarks against corruption and waste, to speak out and join me in opposing these firings. And Elon Musk ought to be also joining because he's against wasteful spending. Which is often their...
their assignment in these different agencies. So Senator Grassley, you mentioned him. He said there may be a good reason that they were fired, but we need to know that. He wants further explanation, he says, from President Trump. He said, regardless, that 30-day detailed notice of removal that the law demands was not provided to Congress. I've talked to some other folks who are part of this caucus that you are a part of for the inspector generals.
They sound like they have concerns as well. Are you confident though in your GOP colleagues? Because you have Senator Grassley here speaking out. Do you think others will too? This caucus is brand new that you guys have on the inspectors general. We formed this caucus because inspectors general do controversial work. They say and blow the whistle when there has been abuse or waste or corruption. They're the bulwarks against that kind of wasteful spending. And that's the reason why our bipartisan caucus, I hope, will
and must provide stronger support and disappointed in
republicans so far that they haven't spoken out you know many of these inspectors general have been very critical of democratic administrations i'm the ranking member on the veterans affairs committee mike missile who was the inspector general for the va was very critical of a number of decisions under the biden administration of the va michael horowitz at justice did a report that was very critical of a number of decisions under democratic administration
They are bipartisan, independent, and we need to preserve that support for them. I challenge my Republican colleagues and the president to reverse this decision. Well, we've asked the White House, too, for more comments, so we'll see what we get on that front. Senator, thank you for making time to come in this morning. Thank you.
All right, President Trump wasting no time issuing executive orders aimed at shutting down the flow of illegal migrants into the country, including sending troops to the border and an effort to end birthright citizenship. But what do the courts have to say about all of this? Our legal panel on the battles ahead. They are next. The law is clear that harboring an illegal alien, smuggling an illegal alien, obstructing law enforcement, obstructing an official proceeding, and a conspiracy to violate the rights of Americans, all of these and many more are criminal statutes.
And so if there's incidences that occur where a public official or an elected individual engages in violations of those criminal statutes, then I fully expect the Department of Justice will follow the letter of the law.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller doubling down on the administration's week one crackdowns on sanctuary cities and states as the president's efforts to end birthright citizenship spark immediate legal challenges in a constitutional debate. So let's bring in our legal panel to break it down. George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley and Tom Dupree, former principal deputy assistant attorney general. Welcome to you both, gentlemen. Thank you.
Thanks. OK, so let's start here. We've got these operations going on, immigration and deportation around the country, and a number of cities and states are saying we're not going to cooperate. Several state attorneys general led by New York's say this. The U.S. Constitution prevents the federal government from commandeering states to enforce federal laws. Tom, how do you see this playing out? I mean, is there a commandeering? Is there a cooperation? Is it don't resist, don't block our federal efforts? Who's in the right?
Well, let's see. It certainly is true that under our Constitution, the federal government cannot commandeer or conscript state officials into serving federal policies. But at the same time, state officials cannot act in a way that obstructs or thwarts federal immigration policy, including law enforcement. And you can't have a universe in which the federal government is attempting to enforce the laws of the United States, including the immigration laws,
and you have state or local officials taking everything, every step to undermine that activity, to thwart federal policy, to prevent the effective implementation of federal law. So I do think the Constitution is pretty clear here, and I haven't seen anything in the new slate of executive orders that suggests that the administration is overstepping that constitutional line by trying to commandeer or to conscript state officials into service. So Jonathan, you've
heard this language from Stephen Miller this week talking about, hey, listen, there are laws out there against harboring illegal immigrants and those kinds of things. DOJ can pursue potential possibilities against, whether civil or criminal, against state or local officials. I don't know what that means, actual prosecutions. But there's also language in the executive order about cutting off federal funding to these places as well. What potential dangers could these leaders legally face in these sanctuary cities and states?
- Well, there's nothing in the Constitution that requires the federal government to fund its own demise. You don't have to give these states money if it's being used to undermine federal policy. The key here with the anti-commandeering principle is there's gotta be a strong nexus and it has to be limited. If you deny all federal funds to a city or state,
it very well can trigger the anti-commandeering doctrines. You have to be focused, you have to have that nexus to say, look, you're not going to get Justice Department funds when you are interfering with the Justice Department enforcing federal laws. There's a lot of funding. I can say to my new Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, hey, find a keto-friendly restaurant nearby and text it to Beth and Steve. And it does without me lifting a finger. So I can get in more squats anywhere I can. One, two, three.
Three. Will that be cash or credit? Credit. Galaxy S25 Ultra, the AI companion that does the heavy lifting so you can do you. Get yours at Samsung.com. Compatible with select apps requires Google Gemini account results may vary based on input check responses for accuracy. Within that, those parameters, I think they can use. In terms of officials who are accurate,
SUBVERTING EFFORTS, YEAH, THEY CAN CROSS THE LINE AS WELL. IT'S OFTEN A VERY DIFFICULT LINE FOR COURTS TO DIVINE. BUT THERE IS PERIL HERE FOR STATE OFFICIALS, BOTH IN TERMS OF THEIR BUDGETS BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF THEIR INDIVIDUAL ACTIONS. AND EVERYONE IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL TO STAY WITHIN THE NAVIGATIONAL BEACONS OF THEIR AUTHORITY.
So let's start to birthright citizenship, because this is another thing that President Trump said that he was going to try. And we've got this executive order saying you don't get automatic U.S. citizenship simply by being born here. Here's what the 14th Amendment says. All persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. Now, the ACLU is sounding very bullish on their chance to win. There are numerous lawsuits. The thing has already been stayed by a federal judge in Seattle. They say this.
We will not let this attack on newborns go unchallenged. The Trump administration's overreach is so egregious that we are confident we will ultimately prevail. Tom, if it goes to the highest court, will they?
Well, I don't think they're going to meet with a whole lot of success in the lower courts. It has been fairly well settled law for a long time that birthright citizenship is encompassed within the 14th Amendment. But look, you're right. The Supreme Court is ultimately going to be the decider of this issue. And I think that the Trump administration, their argument is going to have to be that things have changed. That yes, back when the 14th Amendment was enacted, there was an understanding that if you were illegal aliens in this country and you had a child, that child was entitled to birthright citizenship.
But the argument would now have to go that things have changed and that we are under an invasion and that the rules of the game have changed and that just as back when the 14th Amendment was passed, people would not extend birthright citizenship to say children born to soldiers who have invaded the United States. It shouldn't be extended in this circumstance. My personal view is I think it's a fairly bold and audacious legal argument.
They've already encountered a lot of pushback from some lower federal judges. But at the end of the day, it's the United States Supreme Court that's going to sort out whether or not the 14th Amendment still means what we've always thought it has meant. So, Jonathan, is there a victory in the courts for the Trump administration, or is this going to be sort of a, well, you've got to amend the Constitution if you want to change how the 14th Amendment has been understood for the most part until now?
Well, I think the initial argument of the Trump administration might be a little bit different in the sense that you have an amendment that has clarity on both ends, that if you're born in this country, you are a citizen. But in the middle are these six maddening words that people have been debating over since it was first enacted or ratified.
And I think that members of the Supreme Court may want to look at that. When the 14th Amendment was drafted, some of the individuals involved in that process, some of the members of Congress said that they believed it did not extend birthright citizenship. And that has really fueled a lot of this debate. And as Tom says, the law itself coming out of the courts has been fairly stable since then.
But this hasn't had a lot of treatment by the Supreme Court. So the Supreme Court could adopt a different interpretation. But the Trump administration may win either way. That is, if they lose in the courts, this is going to be playing out right before the midterm elections. Most citizens, it seems like in polls, the majority of citizens do not approve of birthright citizenship. We're in the minority of countries recognizing birthright citizenship.
And that may be what the Trump administration is looking for. If they lose in the courts, they could start a constitutional amendment campaign. And this is a wedge issue that they might invite. Yeah, sometimes the legal loss is a political way, as President Trump could attest. He's now president again. OK, Jonathan and Tom, thank you very much. Always great to see you guys. Thank you.
Up next, President Trump says FEMA's days may be numbered as he tours disaster zones across the country. Our Sunday panel weighs in on the fate of that federal agency and a slew of presidential action in week one.
I'm not saying that there's not changes that are needed. We made a lot of changes over the last four years to try to remove some of the bureaucracy, and we made great strides in that. There is always room for improvement. FEMA has been a very big disappointment. They cost a tremendous amount of money. It's very bureaucratic, and it's very slow. Other than that, we're very happy with them, okay?
Well, FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell and President Trump with very different takes on the state of the agency. So let's take it to our Sunday group. Wall Street Journal White House reporter Annie Linsky, Kevin Roberts, Heritage President, Forbes contributing writer and Fox News contributor Richard Fowler, and Horst Cooper, Project 21 president and former constitutional law professor. Horst, we could have used you on the last panel as well, but we'll maybe get into some of your legal insights.
Let's start with this whole FEMA situation here because Semaphore is reporting that there will be an executive order at last check of the White House website. It is not up. We haven't heard that there's anything official about FEMA. They say the order will establish a group whose members will include the secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense, in addition to private sector subject matter experts. It says the task force is going to be issuing a report to President Trump on how the Federal Disaster Response Agency currently functions and ultimately recommend changes, which could include reorganizing or getting rid of
of FEMA. Kevin, what happens with disaster relief if FEMA went away? KEVIN HART: If FEMA goes away, disaster relief becomes a lot more efficient. And I say that as someone who grew up on the Gulf Coast. I remember Hurricane Andrew, 1992,
all of us waiting for the power to come back, for the supplies to arrive. And the only thing that could provide those things, Shannon, were local people. FEMA is in microcosm what's wrong with the federal government. It's bloated. It's bureaucratic. It's inefficient. It is outdated. And I applaud President Trump for doing this on behalf of disaster relief for everyday Americans. It would be a great update to the federal government. You say the Gulf Coast. I also grew up there. Is it where it's Gulf of America now?
It is Gulf of America. There's 10 inches of snow in my hometown. It's hard to believe. Exactly. I know. My Floridians are all covered in snow down there. I've got the pictures to prove it. Richard, I saw you shaking your head. You don't agree that getting rid of FEMA would make things better. Well, a couple of things. One, I, too, lived through Andrew. I was a lot younger back then. Were you alive? I was. I was. I was living in Broward County. I think this is ageism, Richard. I remember.
I remember it too, but I wasn't grown up with it. During the time of Andrew-- and look, I think what we know from natural disasters in this country is that for when natural disasters and the response to them happen correctly, it's when state, federal, and local governments are all working together. The job of FEMA is to empower and embolden local and state officials to do their jobs better, to get them the resources they need as fast as possible. We can all acknowledge that there's been mistakes made by FEMA, whether it was
you know, Katrina and others. And so I do think that this committee is the right way to go. But the idea is just abolish a federal agency that has had success in many cases in getting things right and doing things right and delivering resources.
It's important, right? And I think also, too, when you have the politics of natural disaster, that's the thing that always breaks my heart in these type of situations. When you see members of Congress. Every day, thousands of Comcast engineers and technologists like Kunle put people at the heart of everything they create. In the average household, there are dozens of connected devices. Here in the Comcast family, we're building an integrated in-home Wi-Fi solution for millions of families like my own.
It brings people together in meaningful ways. Kuhnle and his team are building a Wi-Fi experience that connects one billion devices every year. Learn more about how Comcast is redefining the future of connectivity at comcastcorporation.com slash Wi-Fi. Try to attach Wi-Fi
voter ID or this or that to natural disaster relief for people who are in need, especially given -- I'm specifically talking about California, when many of the states that are going through this, when it's California, when it's New York, when it's other places, have contributed so much to the federal general fund. They're like, listen, we just need some of the money that we put in back.
And I think right now more than ever we can reform FEMA, but to get rid of it and think that's going to be efficiency, I think that's the wrong way to go. Well, speaking of the politics, President Trump visited North Carolina, then he was touching down in California. There wasn't a plan to be with Governor Newsom. Well, Governor Newsom had a plan to be there because he was on the tarmac. The L.A. Times says this. Newsom was among a collection of prominent California Democrats who welcomed Trump on Friday in Los Angeles. With wildfires raging across the county, working peacefully with the president might boost tensions.
their political standing. And it feels like, man, a 180. If in California your political standing is boosted by hanging out with President Trump, something has changed. That's true. That is right. I know I think, you know, I think Governor Newsom displayed a lot of chutzpah by showing up and greeting Air Force One, which typically, you know, the governors do do that when the
President's plane lands. And I think that there's more to more than meets the eye than with the relationship between Newsom and Trump. I mean, the two have certainly been at loggerheads. They've used each other as punching bags during campaign seasons. They've also worked together on covid on fires previously. So these two men have a history together and they're both showmen. They both know they both know how to get headlines.
But they do know how to work together. Well, and I keep using the word frenemies for them because they really kind of are. They do work together when they have to. Politico says this. They're quoting a veteran Democratic strategist in L.A. who said for most of the 20th century, California was entirely a Republican state. On the list of things he could accomplish if he decides not to be the vengeful Donald is the possibility that he could help accomplish a pretty significant shift in the electoral ballots. Horace, is California going to turn red?
Oh, well, a lot of America is turning red. After November, what we saw was a dramatic shift in this country. County after county after county was more red in 2024 than it was in 2020. But to talk about FEMA here for just a moment,
If you have FEMA's record, it's going to be very difficult to survive the threat of dissolution. You can't have emails where you say, I went to this house and had a Trump sign, so we went on pass. In my case, in 2021, we had a record winter storm in Texas. It was 2022 that we got reached out by FEMA to ask us if we needed any help. That was a long time.
TIME LATER. THE RECORD OF FEMA ISN'T GOOD, AND IF THEY CONTINUE THE RECORD THAT THEY HAVE, THEY'RE HEADING FOR DISSOLUTION VERY QUICKLY. WELL, ONE OF THE OTHER EXECUTIVE ORDERS THIS WEEK FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS ABOUT RELEASING INFORMATION ON VARIOUS ASSASSINATIONS, RFK, JFK.
Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., he says their families and the American people deserve transparency and truth. He says it's in the national interest to finally release all the records related to these assassinations without delay. There's a bit of a process going through the documentation. Who thinks we're going to learn anything new? Surprising. Oh, I do. You know, I'm a historian by training. And from that perspective, from the perspective of just an observer, there's no politics in this. I think the American people realize they want to get to the bottom of this. This is also what's driving a lot of
Americans, especially young people on the so-called new right, to try to figure out what's going on with aliens in outer space. It seems to this middle-aged guy like a little bit of an esoteric interest that is the alien thing. It's not esoteric to understand why very important Americans were assassinated, but also, very importantly, why did the federal government, including some senior people in the previous Republican administration, block them from being released? This is the kind of thing that Donald Trump is doing to bring the everyday American's
back to Washington DC.
FBI was actually going after him because he fought for civil rights. He fought for human rights. He fought for what today we call diversity, equity and inclusion. And I think when we release this record, hopefully it's a time for this country to realize many of the things that Martin Luther King fought for are things that the current administration is fighting against. Case in point, the 1965 executive order that Trump overturned was something that Dr. King advocated for. So it's important that these doctors get released. And hopefully it's a recollection that we still have a lot of work to do as a country.
Well, the country is bracing for what we may find out, but it's going to take a little time to get there. Panel, don't go far because Silicon Valley is cozying up to President Trump. The who's who of the tech giants, they were there. They turned out for the inauguration. So President Trump says it's time to secure America's place as the world's AI leader. But there's some bad blood in this group right here. A little clashing in the Trump inner circle. More on that next.
How do we manage this? I mean, I can't imagine how hungry and thirsty this technology is going to get as it needs more and more energy to perform. One thing we hear again and again is some communities don't want data centers or chip fab facilities or new power plants. And some really do.
And I think the United States is a gigantic country and there will be plenty of room to do this. Well, that was OpenAI CEO Sam Altman talking to me late last year about the need for these data centers to power the country's rapidly advancing artificial intelligence technology. Now, this week he was there at the White House as the president rolled out this multibillion dollar plan to meet.
You know what's smart? Enjoying a fresh gourmet meal at home that you didn't have to cook. Meet Factor, your loophole in the laws of mealtime. Chef-crafted meals delivered with a tap, ready in just two minutes. You know what's even smarter? Treating yourself without cheating your goals. Factor is dietician-approved, chef-prepared, and you-plated. Pretty smart, huh? Refresh your routine and eat smart with Factor. Learn more at factormeals.com.
that need here in the U.S. We are back with our panel and Horace, it was almost immediately answered by Elon Musk stepping on what happened there at the White House saying, oh, they don't have the money for it. How much of this is Musk wanting to be front and center, President Trump's best friend and no one else intrudes, despite all the tech bros showing up?
Well, the president says the two men don't like each other. It's true. There is litigation, to be fair. And there is, therefore, some expression of that occurring. The thing that I'm most excited about is the importance of new energy generation centers. Whether we're talking about factories or plants, et cetera, we need...
more energy in America and we need to deploy efforts whether it's in Alaska whether it's on the American Gulf wherever we may find it we need to start doing it and so that I was very excited that they're going to bring in these kinds of resources that likely are going to follow with new energy development
It was just part of this visual we got this week with the inauguration with all of these top Silicon Valley guys showing up. Maureen Dowd writing in The New York Times says, it's a remarkable spectacle watching an entirely new power center flock to Washington, fight for Trump's attention, jockey to prove their loyalty, post groveling commonems to Trump, throw money at him, clamor for eight-figure mansions around town. I mean, Annie, this is not what we've seen in the past, at least during a GOP administration. That's
- It's true, I mean it's sort of a new power click coming to town. And this is a group of people that if you reverse, I don't know, five or six years, many of them were very, I'm trying to think of a polite way to say it, opposed to Donald Trump. That's a polite way.
So, you know, they have some making up to do with the president and they've been very quick to do so. And I thought that the AI announcement also showed a significant shift from Biden to Trump. And this was one of the biggest shifts. I mean, Biden was very cautious, very scared of AI and was putting up guardrails around the technology. Trump is seeing it as...
Fox News Audio presents the Fox Nation Investigates podcast, Evil Next Door. Exploring the life and crimes of five serial predators from across the United States. Follow and listen starting February 25th at foxtruecrime.com. It's an opportunity. And that's what many of the people surrounding him, not all, Musk and Altman, to your point, have had disagreements about AI. But Altman is seeing it as an opportunity.
opportunity and is a way to get the country in a place where it can compete with the Chinese who are also seeing AI as an opportunity. Exactly. And President Trump does not want to fall behind them. That's clear from this administration. That's one of the driving forces on getting this AI and the power force it needs.
centered here in the U.S. Now, about this spat between the tech bros, Steve Bannon, who's been on the inner circle of Trump for a long time, says this to Politico, I've never seen action like this in my life about Musk kind of stepping on the announcement. He says he also called on White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles to sit him down and sort it out immediately.
And, Kevin, it sounds like there has been some Suze Weil/Elon Musk conversation-ing going on this weekend on various issues. KEVIN HART: Probably makes some sense. Suze's doing a great job as chief of staff. He ran a great campaign. And, look, I think these are growing pains of the Trump realignment.
And for this movement, lifelong movement conservative, it's great to see all of these men and women who, as Andy said, politely opposed Trump the last time come around. It remains to be seen if the skepticism that I might have about a few of them, say Jeff Bezos and some others, will, of course, be legitimate. But ultimately, I applaud Trump for trying to do this, and that is as it relates to artificial intelligence.
It's balancing the need for American innovation with the common good, because that for not just conservatives, but I would like to think for liberal friends, too, is really something that we can agree on. And if Chief of Staff Suzy Wiles can, of course, bring this home and keep everyone on the reservation, then I'm really optimistic about the policy outcome. JUDY WOODRUFF: What do you make of it, Richard?
It's got to be quite a big reservation. Look, I think there's a couple of things. I do think that it was very interesting to watch an inauguration where you saw in the second row, almost across from all of the former elected presidents, were tech CEOs instead of governors or folks who were democratically elected by the people. You saw people who sort of bought their way into the inauguration and they were allowed to do so. And I think that causes pause for a lot of Americans. I think with that being said, when you think about Donald Trump's agenda, which is an American first agenda, or America first agenda,
it's important to remember that for this AI expansion that he wants to happen, it's going to require foreign resources, right? Remember, Joe Biden's last trip in December was to Angola. Part of that trip was to install a train line, which is gonna move copper to the port so the copper could come to America to produce power here in America to generate AI. If you continue on the path of the Rubio State Department, which is no more foreign aid,
then this sort of puts a stalemate in Trump's plan to create these sort of AI generating farms, to create this AI power, which is necessary. So for the Trump team, how do you create AI without a foreign policy that focuses on investing in other countries that have the raw materials to make it possible? - By creating energy in our own country, which we haven't done in the last four years. - Yeah, but we don't have copper. - We don't have copper. - Yeah, we need copper. - Yeah, there's Greenland. - We don't have copper here. - We're the most abundant natural resources in the world. - But we don't have copper. Copper's critical for AI and for the world.
for the farms and they don't have it. And you have to go to an African schedule. I feel like President Trump is a wheeler dealer who will find a way to get his hands on what he thinks America needs. But I do think that he's very much about the center of conversation should be about focusing as much of that production here as possible. And with the hundreds of billions of dollars that showed up at the White House, we'll see how that all materializes and whether the robots take over. Okay, panel. Thank you.
Thank you very much. See you next Sunday. Up next, a preview of my conversation with a young pastor who's a favorite of Gen Z. He's not afraid to tackle some really tough subjects.
Quick note, my podcast Live in the Bream drops today. This week I talked with pastor and best-selling author Jonathan Pakluta, JP, about his new book, Your Story Has a Villain. It's all about finding your way to victory and peace in life. If you need that, check it out. Live in the Bream, wherever you like to get your podcasts. That is it for us today. Thank you for joining us. I'm Shannon Bream. Have a wonderful week. We'll see you next Fox News Sunday.
Listen to Fox News Sunday ad-free on Amazon Music with your Prime membership or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.