The latest showdown involving President Trump centers on whether the White House violated a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. The court ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the release of a Maryland man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, after he was mistakenly deported to a prison in El Salvador. A federal judge criticized Trump officials earlier this week for not following up on the order. Democrats say the standoff raises vital questions of due process, while the Trump administration accuses Abrego Garcia of being part of the violent MS-13 gang.
President Trump this week said his administration is also examining the possible deportation of U.S. citizens to El Salvador. So, where are things headed if the Trump administration flouts the rule of law? With Elon Musk overseeing sharp cuts to government programs, how should Democrats respond? And how can people concerned about the Trump administration make their voices heard? This week on Political Roundtable, I’m going in-depth with U.S. Senator Jack Reed.
TRANSCRIPT
This has been edited for length and clarity
Ian Donnis: Let’s start with the legal showdown over federal deportations of various migrants to a prison in El Salvador. If the Trump administration does not comply with judicial orders and does not respond to a contempt finding, what recourse is there against executive power?
U.S. Senator Jack Reed: Well, the only recourse ultimately is impeachment. And I think the president is either consciously or unconsciously producing or provoking a constitutional crisis. He is, in his actions, ignoring the court, ignoring due process, which is a fundamental aspect of our country, regardless of your citizenship status, and he’s got an individual down there without proof in a very, very difficult prison.
Donnis: You’ve raised the prospect of impeachment, but your party is in the minority in the Senate and the House. So what do you do?
Sen. Reed: Well, what you do is you try to persuade colleagues on the other side, as we did after January 6th, that that behavior is unconstitutional. It is high crimes and misdemeanors, but I must say at this juncture, I’m not optimistic that the House would vote a bill of impeachment, nor the Senate would convict, but you asked a very specific question. What if he defies the court as he appears to be doing? Now, what is the remedy? And that’s the remedy.
Donnis: There was one instance of a man who was deported who, his supporters say, he does not have a criminal record or gang affiliations, but many of the people who have been deported by the Trump administration do have criminal records and gang affiliations. So I wonder, is this the right fight for Democrats to pick with the President?
Sen. Reed: Well, he’s made it an issue, not of immigration, but of constitutional law. Is due process appropriate or available to everyone as the Constitution requires? And that’s why there are a lot of Republicans who are very upset and taking it out on their representatives about Mr. Garcia in that prison in El Salvador because he’s first, but Trump is muttering things like, well, I’d like to send citizens down there, et cetera. If we lose our protections from unreasonable search and seizure from just being picked up in the street at night by masked people thrown in the car and next time end up in El Salvador, that’s a threat to our country. It is complete disrespect for the Constitution, and that’s what Trump does almost on a constant basis. So that’s the difference.
Donnis: Let’s switch gears and talk about the president’s controversial tariff program. This has its roots in the Clinton administration back in the nineties, when the Clinton administration embraced a policy for much greater Chinese imports to the United States in the hopes that it would be good for the U.S., good for China. It seems like China has benefited economically, but there has been no increase in democracy there. So I wonder with the benefit of hindsight, was that approach by the Clinton administration a mistake?
Sen. Reed: Well, I think what they were trying to do is create a global economy, and I was opposed to many of the Clinton policies, particularly NAFTA, because we were not preparing ourselves for the consequences, that is investing in replacement jobs, not in old manufacturing, but in new manufacturing all across the country. With Trump, this is not targeted just at China and it’s not well targeted. He is threatening sanctions and tariffs on Canada and Mexico, the whole world, and the result has been economic turmoil.
Donnis: But is Trump correct that the US-China trade relationship needs to be reordered?
Sen. Reed: Well, it could be reordered, but he’s not trying to do that. He’s just lashing out at China, hoping that they’ll come to him and he can appear to be the savior. Reality is that the jobs that have been displaced overseas, not just China, but other places, are not the types of jobs that’ll come back to the United States because our wages are higher, thank goodness, because of many other things. What we have to do is invest in the future, not look back at the past. That’s why the CHIPS bill that President Biden pushed through is so good, so good. It enhances and encourages high-tech businesses to come to the United States and build factories here for our workers for the future. That’s why all of our investment in science and research, which he’s trying to undo, attacking universities, attacking the National Institute for Health, that gives us the momentum to go into the future as the leading economy and leading inventors in the world. We’re gonna lose that to China.
Donnis: You staged a Social Security event with Congressman Magaziner in Providence this week. In responding to my coverage that a reader/listener of our station asked how citizens can really speak up effectively, something that you and Congressman Magazine exhorted people concerned about the Trump administration to do. So, what is the most effective way that citizens can speak up or respond to the Trump administration?
Sen. Reed: Well, the most effective way is here in the community, make it clear that social security must be protected and do that as you talk to your friends in the supermarkets as you go to public events. But the real critical audience is in those red states, frankly. So if they have friends who are in Iowa and Nebraska, et cetera, they should get on the phone and say, you know, they’re gonna take away our social security and that is gonna be critical to you as is critical to me. And we’re starting to see the pushback in local town hall meetings across the Midwest, particularly about, hey, this program that Trump has makes no sense. Not only social security about taking apart the United States AID, an international aid agency. A lot of farmers have lost millions of dollars of contracts and then aren’t happy and it’s not helping it at all in the world.
Donnis: We’re talking here with US Senator Jack Reed and Senator author Chris Whipple writes in his new book that President Biden’s family and closest advisors were, quote, in a fog of delusion and denial about his ability to serve another term. Should democratic voters be upset that this was the case and this probably sandbagged efforts to retain the White House?
Sen. Reed: Well, I think first you have to give the president credit for ultimately stepping back, which very few presidents have done.
Donnis: At a point, though, that probably handicapped the Democratic effort.
Sen. Reed: Well, at a point where you couldn’t have a primary system, which would’ve given us perhaps another candidate, but also would’ve allowed the campaign to develop, to make contact, to be frankly more competitive with Trump. So, in retrospect, you know, there was a series of mistakes as you recall. I did this, what I thought was in a private meeting, I said to the White House that you have to get an examination of the president’s cognitive skills and by two independent neurosurgeons neurologists. And get it out publicly.
Donnis: When did you say that?
Sen. Reed: I said that about two weeks before he stepped out of the race. And it was used I think to as one point to discuss with him that he should get out of the race. But that was a point I made in confidence because I think President Biden, if you look at his record, has done a good job. But at that point he had to reassure the public and myself, but the public more importantly, that he had the cognitive abilities, not only to continue his term, but also one more term we hoped.
Donnis: The presidential election last year, do you consider the main takeaways that Democrats have to focus more on the economy, talk like regular people, and be more centrist on cultural and social issues?
Sen. Reed: Well, I happen to think we have to do all of those things and much more. I think one of the things is we have to communicate better to the public. I think the Trump campaign was very shrewd in the way they used social media, the way they targeted their voters, the messages they sent, which really the ones at the end of the campaign that were not about the economy. They were more, you know, cultural issues and, you know, we have to respect everyone’s persona, humanity, et cetera. But we also, I think, have to connect as you suggest with working people. The Democratic consistency we had in the past, and I think we’ll get in the future.
Donnis: The Republicans in Washington are moving ahead with plans to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides some financial support for public radio stations such as The Public’s Radio and Rhode Island PBS. Is this a fait accompli, considering how Republicans were in the majority in Congress?
Sen. Reed: Well, the procedural rule is that the president will send up legislation. We have 45 days to ratify the legislation, but it’s a majority vote in both the House and the Senate. And if the Republicans stay true to their recent tunes, it’ll probably pass. What Trump is trying to do, and it’s not just with PBS and other things. It’s with our universities. He’s trying to destroy anyone who could be critical of him, destroy any institution that in the past has criticized him. It’s vanity, it’s revenge, it’s not appropriate. And indeed, I don’t think it’s even constitutional.
Donnis: You’re a grad of Harvard Law School, right? Harvard’s been in the spotlight for standing up to the Trump administration. How do you see the outlook for Universities like Harvard and Brown to move forward while facing the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding?
Sen. Reed: Well, if they didn’t stand up, it would be a huge disappointment because they would be surrendering their First Amendment rights. They would be giving away a tradition of scholarship, of thinking of thoughts that are not popular, but must be analyzed and examined, and, frankly, the other thing is, once Trump gets you to bow down, he’ll be back for more. Look at the law firms that he went ahead and said, “Oh, you can’t do this or that. I don’t like you here, and, oh, we’ll give you hundreds of millions of dollars of free service.” Two or three weeks later, he’s back saying, that’s not enough. I need more. So I think Harvard understood, one, the principle that they have to stand up for our Constitution and our First Amendment. And two, you can never satisfy Trump.
Donnis: Rhode Island faces a healthcare crisis. The fundamental issue is the lack of reimbursement for public and private insurance. Is there anything that you and other members of the federal delegation can do to help with that?
Sen. Reed: Well, the most important thing we have to do is stop President Trump from taking apart Medicaid by deleting over $800 billion over the next five to 10 years, that’ll destroy the whole healthcare system in Rhode Island.
Donnis: Quick final question: Are you a hundred percent committed to running for reelection next year?
Sen. Reed: I am a hundred percent committed.
Donnis: Alright, that’s all the time we have. Thank you so much for joining us, US Senator Jack Reed.
Sen. Reed: Thank you, Ian.
