>>> HELLO, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR & CO." HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

PRESIDENT TRUMP MEETS JORDAN'S KING ABDULLAH, WHILE THE ISRAEL-HAMAS CEASEFIRE HANGS IN THE BALANCE.

IS THERE ANY WAY FORWARD?

I DISCUSS WITH THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE ARAB LEAGUE.

>>> THEN, AS THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TRIES TO SLASH FUNDING FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH, WE LOOK INTO THE LONG-TERM IMPACT ON AMERICA'S HEALTH.

>>> AND "THE SEED OF THE SACRED FIG."

SPEAKING TO THE GREAT FILMMAKER MOHAMMAD RASOULOF ABOUT HIS OSCAR-NOMINATED NEW FILM AND HIS OWN FLIGHT FROM IRAN.

>>> PLUS -- >> SINCE 1865, NO PRESIDENT HAS REFUSED TO FOLLOW A DIRECT ORDER FROM THE FEDERAL COURT.

AND SO IF THE PRESIDENT SAYS I'M DEFYING IT, THAT PUTS US CLOSER TO WHAT YOU MIGHT CALL A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.

>> AMERICA'S COURTS PUSH BACK AGAINST AN ONSLAUGHT OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

WALTER ISAACSON DIGS INTO THE LATEST WITH HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR NOAH FELDMAN.

♪ >>> "AMANPOUR & CO." IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT JIM ATTWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS CANDACE KING WEIR THE SYLVIA A.

AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTISEMITISM THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LEILA AND MICKEY STRAUS MARK J. BLECHNER THE FILOMEN M. D'AGOSTINO FOUNDATION SETON J. MELVIN THE PETER G. PETERSON AND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND CHARLES ROSENBLUM KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG JEFFREY KATZ AND BETH ROGERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> AND A WARM WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I'M PAULA NEWTON IN NEW YORK, SITTING IN FOR CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR.

PRESIDENT TRUMP IS MEETING WITH JORDAN'S KING ABDULLAH IN A REGION FACES YET ANOTHER CEASEFIRE.

HAMAS SAYING ISRAEL IS BREAKING THE DEAL.

NOW IN RESPONSE, ISRAEL IS NOW ACCUSING HAMAS OF A COMPLETE VIOLATION OF THE AGREEMENT.

PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU NOW SAYS THEY'LL END THE CEASEFIRE IF HOSTAGES AREN'T RELEASED BY NOON ON SATURDAY AS PLANNED.

NOW MEANTIME, THE U.S. PRESIDENT DOUBLING DOWN ON HIS VERY CONTROVERSIAL PROPOSAL TO PERMANENTLY RELOCATE THE MAJORITY OF PALESTINIANS.

REMEMBER, AT LEAST TWO MILLION PEOPLE FROM GAZA TO EGYPT AND JORDAN.

I WANT YOU TO TAKE A LISTEN NOW TO WHAT HE SAID A LITTLE EARLIER.

>> I BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE A PARCEL OF LAND IN JORDAN.

I BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE A PARCEL OF LAND IN EGYPT.

WE MAY HAVE SOME PLACE ELSE.

BUT I THINK WHEN WE FINISH OUR TALKS, WE'LL HAVE A PLACE WHERE THEY ONLY WANT TO BE ON THE GAZA STRIP BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ELSE.

THEY'VE NEVER HAD AN ALTERNATIVE.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE ON THE GAZA STRIP.

>> THOUGH PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS THREATENING TO CUT AID TO THOSE TWO COUNTRIES IF THEY DON'T ACQUIESCE TO HIS WISHES, HE NOW THINKS WE'LL BRING IN JEREMY DIAMOND WHO IS FOLLOWING ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS.

STARTLING DEVELOPMENTS IN ISRAEL AND AT THE WHITE HOUSE.

I DO WANT TO BEGIN IN ISRAEL WITH THE PRIME MINISTER SAYING THE DEAL IS OFF UNLESS THE HOSTAGES ARE RELEASED SATURDAY MORNING.

>> IN THE THREE WEEKS IT HAS BEEN ONGOING SO FAR.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE WE ARE ONLY JUST PAST THE HALFWAY MARK.

THERE ARE STILL 17 HOSTAGES, NINE OF WHOM ARE LIVING, EXPECTED TO BE RELEASED DURING THE REMAINDER OF THIS DEAL.

AND OF COURSE THE PEOPLE OF GAZA HAVE BEEN PLANNING AND EXPECTING AND HOPING THEY'LL HAVE AT LEAST ANOTHER THREE WEEKS OF CALM, IF NOT LONGER.

BUT WHEREAS A FEW DAYS AGO THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE CEASEFIRE COULD BE EXTENDED AND WE COULD GET TO PHASES 2 AND 3, NOW THE QUESTION IS VERY MUCH ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE WILL GET TO THE END OF PHASE 1.

THE ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER ISSUING THIS ULTIMATUM, SAYING, QUOTE, IF HAMAS DOES NOT RETURN OUR HOSTAGES BY SATURDAY NOON, THE CEASEFIRE WILL END AND THE ISRAELI MILITARY WILL GO BACK TO FIGHTING HAMAS IN GAZA.

NOW A FEW CAVEATS HERE.

NOTABLY, THE ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER DID NOT SAY ALL OF OUR HOSTAGES, WHICH IS WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD SAID YESTERDAY AS HE WAS SUGGESTING THIS ULTIMATUM TO THE ISRAELIS.

SEPARATELY, AN ISRAELI OFFICIAL IS INDEED TELLING US THAT ISRAEL EXPECTS THE NINE REMAINING LIVING HOSTAGES WILL BE RELEASED IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.

OTHERWISE ISRAEL WILL GO BACK TO THE WAR IN GAZA.

AND SO THAT TELLS US A COUPLE OF THINGS.

FIRST OF ALL, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THE PRIME MINISTER IS DEMANDING THE RELEASE OF ALL THE HOSTAGES BY SATURDAY OR THE CEASEFIRE ENDS.

AND IT ALSO TELLS US THAT THE FACT THAT THE PRIME MINISTER DIDN'T SAY A SPECIFIC NUMBER IN HIS REMARKS, HE SEEMS TO BE TRYING TO LEAVE HIMSELF SOME WIGGLE ROOM HERE.

BUT NONETHELESS, THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS THREAT, THE MOST SERIOUS THREAT THAT WE HAVE SEEN TO THE CEASEFIRE SO FAR.

IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE JUST LAST NIGHT, HAMAS SAID IT WOULD NOT EVEN RELEASE THE THREE HOSTAGES SCHEDULED TO BE RELEASED THIS COMING SATURDAY, CITING A SERIES OF ALLEGED ISRAELI VIOLATIONS OF THIS CEASEFIRE.

HAMAS, THOUGH, DID MAKE CLEAR THAT IT WAS LEAVING SOME WIGGLE ROOM AS WELL, LEAVING THE DOOR OPEN FOR THE MEDIATORS TO GET ISRAEL BACK IN LINE WITH THE CEASEFIRE ON A NUMBER OF FRONTS, AND THAT IF THAT HAPPENED BEFORE SATURDAY, THEN THE RELEASE COULD GO AHEAD AS PLANNED.

WE KNOW THAT THE MEDIATORS, EGYPT AND QATAR ARE WORKING TO DISSOLVE THIS DISPUTE BETWEEN ISRAEL AND HAMAS TO PRESERVE THIS CEASEFIRE AGREEMENT AT A TIME WHEN WE KNOW THERE ARE A NUMBER OF FAMILIES HERE IN ISRAEL THAT ARE EXPECTING AND WAITING FOR THE RETURN OF THEIR LOVED ONES IN THE COMING WEEKS.

AND IF THIS CEASEFIRE ENDS, ALL OF THAT COULD BE IN JEOPARDY.

>> LET ME GET SOME PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT THE REACTION IS IN THE REGION GIVEN WHAT HAS GONE ON IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

IT STRIKES ME WE MIGHT BE ON A WAR FOOTING AGAIN IN TERMS OF HAMAS AND ISRAEL, YET THEY'RE ALREADY ARGUING OVER HOW TO REBUILD GAZA.

KING ABDULLAH IS SITTING THERE NEXT TO THE PRESIDENT AS THE PRESIDENT CONTINUALLY DOUBLES DOWN ON ESSENTIALLY EVICTING TWO MILLION PALESTINIANS FROM THEIR HOMELAND IN GAZA.

KING ABDULLAH MADE IT CLEAR THERE IS A PLAN.

WHAT MORE ARE WE LEARNING ABOUT WHAT COULD BE AN ACCOMMODATION HERE?

>> YEAH, IT APPEARS THAT THERE WILL BE SOME DISCUSSIONS INVOLVING EGYPT AND SAUDI ARABIA AS WELL.

THERE WAS A REFERENCE IN THAT SPRAY BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND KING ABDULLAH TO SOME LAND IN EGYPT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE OF USE FOR PALESTINIANS TO GO THERE.

BUT I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND A FEW THINGS, WHICH IS THAT WHILE THE PRESIDENT IS TALKING ABOUT PERMANENTLY DISPLACING PALESTINIANS FROM GAZA, BOTH JORDAN AND EGYPT HAVE MADE EXPLICITLY CLEAR THAT THEY REJECT THAT NOTION ENTIRELY, THAT PALESTINIANS MUST BE ALLOWED TO EITHER REMAIN OR TO RETURN TO THE GAZA STRIP WHEREAS THE PRESIDENT IS TALKING ABOUT TURNING INTO IT THIS U.S. REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT THAT HE IS CALLING THE RIVIERA OF THE MIDDLE EAST.

BUT THE PRESIDENT WAS MAKING VERY CLEAR TODAY THAT HE IS NOT ABANDONING THIS IDEA AT ALL.

THE KING OF JORDAN DID TALK ABOUT TAKING IN SOME 2,000 SICK AND WOUNDED CHILDREN FROM GAZA.

WE KNOW THAT JORDAN HAS BEEN RECEIVING MEDICAL EVACUATIONS FROM GAZA.

BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE ISRAELIS HAVE BEEN LIMITING THE NUMBER OF MEDICAL EVACUATIONS TAKING PLACE FROM GAZA.

SO THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT THE PRESIDENT IS DOUBLING DOWN ON THESE IDEAS.

THE REGION AT LARGE IS STILL REJECTING THOSE IDEAS, BUT THEY ARE FINDING A WAY TO ALLOW FOR CONTINUED TALKS ON THIS THAT WILL AT LEAST KEEP THIS ISSUE ON THE BACK BURNER FOR NOW.

>> UNDERSTOOD.

JEREMY DIAMOND FOR US, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE UPDATE.

APPRECIATE IT.

AND WE DO WANT TO GET MORE ON ALL THESE DEVELOPMENTS WITH HOSSAM ZAKI, A LONG-TIME EGYPTIAN DIPLOMAT WHO IS CURRENTLY ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE ARAB LEAGUE.

AND THE ARAB LEAGUE IN FACT AT THE FOREFRONT OF WHATEVER PLAN THERE MIGHT BE FOR GAZA.

BEFORE WE GET TO THAT, THOUGH, I DO WANT TO GET YOUR REACTION TO BENJAMIN NETANYAHU NOW SAYING THAT IF HAMAS DOES NOT RETURN OUR HOSTAGES, HE SAYS, BY SATURDAY NOON, THE CEASEFIRE WILL END AND THE IDF, KEY HERE, THE IDF WILL RETURN TO INTENSE FIGHTING UNTIL HAMAS IS COMPLETELY DEFEATED.

I DO WANT TO GET YOUR REACTIONS FROM HAMAS AND THE PRIME MINISTER AS WELL.

>> REALLY, IT'S A REGRETTABLE SITUATION, AND THERE WAS A DEAL, AND THE DEAL WAS MADE WITH THE HELP OF EGYPT AND QATAR.

AND BOTH MADE SURE THAT THEY WERE GUARANTORS OF THIS DEAL.

NOW WE HEAR THAT THE ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER IS RENEGING ON THE DEAL, AND THIS IS PUTTING A LOT IN JEOPARDY IN THIS SITUATION, WHICH IS ALREADY VERY INFLAMED SITUATION.

SO WE HOPE THINGS WILL COOL DOWN, HEADS WILL COOL DOWN, AND THE DEAL WILL BE ALLOWED TO BE EXECUTED AS PLANNED, AS AGREED.

>> DO YOU BELIEVE THAT PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP, UNFORTUNATELY, ADDED TO WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?

I'LL REMIND YOU HE SAID HIMSELF HE SET THIS DEADLINE FOR SATURDAY SAYING, AND I'M QUOTING HIM, "LET ALL HELL BREAK OUT IF ALL THE HOSTAGES ARE NOT RELEASED BY SATURDAY."

DID THE PRESIDENT CONTRIBUTE TO THIS, PERHAPS THE DISMANTLING OF THE CEASEFIRE DEAL?

>> YOU KNOW, PAULA, THE SAD THINGS ABOUT ALL THIS IS THAT WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING UP AT THE UNITED STATES 46 YEARS AGO, AND EVER SINCE AS THE MAJOR AND MAIN PEACE MAKER IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

EVER SINCE IT BROKERED THE PEACE DEAL BETWEEN EGYPT AND ISRAEL, THE CORNERSTONE OF PEACE AND STABILITY MANY THIS REGION.

NOW IT SEEMS THAT THINGS ARE NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE.

IT SEEMS IS THAT THE UNITED STATES WITH THE NEW ADMINISTRATION NOW WANTS TO ALTER SOME THINGS, SOME THINGS THAT THE ARAB SIDE CONSIDER AS BEING FUNDAMENTAL, PIVOTAL, AND THERE IS REALLY NO WAY OF ALTERING SUCH THINGS.

AND THIS IS BECOMING VERY DIFFICULT.

OF COURSE, WHEN YOU -- WHEN YOU SEE THE SUFFERING OF THE HOSTAGES ONLY, THAT MAKE S -- I TALKS A LOT ABOUT HOW YOU SEE THE WHOLE CONFLICT.

ON THE OTHER SIDE, THE PALESTINIAN SIDE, WE HAVE ABOUT 50,000 PEOPLE THERE.

100,000 PEOPLE INCLUDING, OF COURSE, WOMEN AND CHILDREN WHO WERE MAIMED, WHO WERE INJURED IN THIS CONFLICT BY ISRAEL.

NOT WORRIED ABOUT THEM.

THIS IS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT THING TO ACCEPT.

WE WANT TO LOOK UP TO THE UNITED STATES AGAIN AS A PEACEMAKER IN THE MIDDLE EAST, NOT A COUNTRY THAT INFLAMES THE SITUATION.

>> WITH YOUR WORDS, THOUGH, CONSIDERING HOW PIVOTAL YOUR ORGANIZATION IS TRYING TO BE IN ALL OF THIS, DO YOU RISK INFLAMING THINGS FURTHER HERE?

KING ABDULLAH WAS VERY CLEAR IN SAYING THAT, LOOK, THERE IS GOING TO BE THIS MEETING AT THE END OF THE MONTH WITH THE ARAB LEAGUE.

WHAT MORE CAN YOU TELL US?

CAN YOU FILL IN SOME DETAILS ABOUT WHAT THIS PLAN LOOKS LIKE?

BECAUSE HE VERY CLEARLY HAS SOMETHING IN MIND, SOMETHING THAT HE IS TELLING DONALD TRUMP ABOUT AT THE WHITE HOUSE.

>> WELL, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU HERE NOW IS THAT, YES, THE LEADERS OF THE ARAB LEAGUE ARE GOING TO MEET IN CAIRO ON THE 27th.

THEY'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THE SITUATION IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING THE PROPOSAL CONCERNING GAZA.

IT IS CLEAR THAT THE LEADERS IN THEIR WISDOM ARE GOING TO BE DEBATING THE WHOLE THING.

AND STRESSING ON THE PRINCIPLES THAT THEY THINK SHOULD BE STRESSED BECAUSE IT APPEARS THAT THOSE PRINCIPLES ARE NOW PUT ASIDE, IGNORED, NEGLECT ED BY AGAIN, THE PEACEMAKER, THE MAIN PEACE MAKER IN THE MIDDLE EAST, OR WHAT WE USED TO CONSIDER AS THE MAIN PEACE MAKER IN THE MIDDLE EAST, THE UNITED STATES.

SO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE HERE IS TO EXPLAIN TO THE U.S. ADMINISTRATION THAT THIS IS NOT THE END OF THE ROAD.

WE CAN PUT THIS IN THE BACK BURNER, AND WE CAN STILL TALK.

BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE CERTAIN PRINCIPLES THAT ARE -- THAT ARE STRESSED AND THAT ARE RESPECTED AMONG WHICH AND IN THE FOREFRONT OF WHICH IS THAT PALESTINIANS OWN THEIR LAND, AND THEY CANNOT BE DISPLACED FROM THEIR LAND.

THIS IS PIVOTAL TO UNDERSTAND THE CONFLICT OF THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT.

>> AND YET THE PRESIDENT PERSISTS.

AND ONE OF THE REASONS HE PERSISTS IS THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT CONTINUES TO TELL HIM LOOK, IT'S CLEAR FROM THE HOSTAGE RELEASES THAT HAMAS REMAINS IN CONTROL IN AT LEAST MOST OF GAZA, YOU CAN SAY.

IS THIS SOMETHING THAT THE ARAB LEAGUE WILL TOLERATE?

IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT?

BECAUSE IT IS CLEAR GOING FORWARD THAT RIGHT NOW WE COULD BE SEEING THE COLLAPSE OF THE CEASEFIRE DEAL, AND BEYOND THAT, STILL NO AGREEMENT ABOUT HOW TO EVEN REBUILD GAZA.

>> THIS IS TRUE.

WHAT YOU RAISED IS AN IMPORTANT POINT, A VERY IMPORTANT POINT.

YES, IT SEEMS TO MANY ON OUR SIDE THAT WHAT IS BEHIND THOSE IDEAS PROPOSED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS THE FACT THAT HAMAS IS IN CONTROL OF GAZA, STILL, AFTER 15 MONTHS OF WAR, AND AFTER ALL THE DESTRUCTION THAT HAPPENED.

AND WE SAID FROM THE BEGINNING THAT UPROOTING HAMAS AS THE ISRAELIS HAVE DECLARED IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY FAR-FETCHED, VERY DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE.

WHAT WE WANT, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING AS ARABS IS A POLITICAL DEAL.

THERE IS NO MILITARY SOLUTION TO THIS SITUATION.

AND WE SAID THIS MANY, MANY TIMES, INCLUDING TO HAMAS, INCLUDING TO HAMAS.

THIS HAS TO BE STRESSED.

SO WHAT WE WANT TO STRESS NOW TO THE INTERLOCUTORS IN THE U.S. ADMINISTRATION IS THAT IF YOU WANT TO PURSUE A ROLE OF PEACEMAKING IN THIS CONFLICT IN THIS CONFLICT IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND HELP THE MIDDLE EAST GET TO A SITUATION OF STABILITY AND PEACE, BUT THEN YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THINGS IN A MORE EVEN HANDED WAY AND PROPOSALS HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE MAJOR PRINCIPLES THAT BOTH SIDES LOOK AT.

SO ARABS LOOK AT SOME PRINCIPLES AS MUCH AS ISRAELIS LOOK AT SOME PRINCIPLES AS WELL.

AND IF THE ISSUE IS WHO'S GOVERNING GAZA, THEN A LOT OF COUNTRIES, A LOT OF LEADERS, A LOT OF GOVERNMENTS HAVE MUCH TO SAY ABOUT THIS, AND THEY CAN CHIP IN WITH IDEAS, WITH PRACTICAL IDEAS.

BUT GIVE IT BACK TO THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY, BECAUSE THIS IS THE RIGHT FRONT AND LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT THAT GOVERNS THE PALESTINIAN TERRITORY.

>> AND THERE IS DISPUTE ABOUT THAT AS WELL.

UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT YOU DESCRIBE SEEMS UNFORTUNATELY LEADING DOWN THE ROAD TO IMPASSE AGAIN.

WE'LL WAIT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS AGAIN THIS WEEKEND AND ALSO OF COURSE WAIT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS AT THE END OF THIS MONTH WITH THIS ARAB LEAGUE MEETING.

HOSSAM ZAKI, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU.

>> NOW, IT'S NOT JUST PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ACTIONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT ARE GETTING SIGNIFICANT PUSHBACK, AS YOU JUST HEARD, IN THE U.S.

HERE TOO JUDGES ARE PREVENTING OR DELAYING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SEVERAL OF HIS EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

AMONG THEM, HALTING PROPOSED CUTS TO THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH'S RESEARCH EFFORTS IN 22 STATES NOW.

DRASTIC CUTS THAT SOME EXPERTS ARGUE COULD SEVERELY IMPACT AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH.

JOINING ME NOW TO TALK ABOUT ALL THIS IS DR. ZEKE EMANUEL.

HE'S A SENIOR FELLOW AT THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS.

HE WAS AN ADVISER TO PRESIDENT BIDEN DURING THE PANDEMIC AND A KEY ARCHITECT OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.

I WANT TO WELCOME YOU TO THE PROGRAM AS WE CONTINUE TO PARSE ALL THESE DEVELOPMENTS WITH THE NIH, THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH.

THE ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OF CAPPING INDIRECT PAYMENTS TO THE NIH SENT CHILLS, I DON'T HAVE TO REMIND YOU, THROUGH THE ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.

WE'VE BEEN HEARING FROM MANY.

A REMINDER THAT THE NIH GRANTS HAVE BEEN CRUCIAL IN GROUNDBREAKING MEDICAL RESEARCH THAT I HAVE TO SAY NOT JUST THE UNITED STATES TAKES PART IN, BUT PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD.

NOW THIS FEDERAL JUDGE HAS IN FACT BLOCKED THE CUTS FOR NOW.

EXPLAIN TO US, YOU KNOW, HOW CRUCIAL THIS FUNDING IS AND HOW IT WORKS.

>> SO THE UNITED STATES HAS BEEN NUMBER ONE IN BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH FOR THE LAST 80 YEARS, AND A LARGE PART OF THAT IS THE NIH FUNDING HOSPITALS, ACADEMIC CENTERS, MEDICAL SCHOOLS, DEPARTMENTS OF BIOLOGY.

AND THE WAY IT IS, IS I AS A RESEARCHER PUT IN A GRANT.

I TELL THEM WHAT I'M GOING TO DO EITHER WITH PATIENTS OR IN A LABORATORY.

THEY GIVE ME THE GRANT, AND MY GRANT COVERS WHAT I'M GOING TO DO.

BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF COSTS THAT MAKE IT POSSIBLE.

INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS, RENT FOR LAB SPACE AND OFFICE SPACE, ADMINISTRATIVE JOBS, WHETHER IT'S PAYROLL OR BUDGETING, AUDITING, LEGAL SERVICES.

IT'S UTILITIES.

IT'S DISPOSING OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE OR BIOLOGICAL WASTE, REFRIGERATION FOR PARTICULAR SAMPLES.

ALL OF THOSE THINGS THE GOVERNMENT SAYS WE'RE NOT GOING TO LOOK AND MAKE YOU ACCOUNT FOR EACH OF THEM.

WE'RE GOING TO CREATE A POT CALLED INDIRECT COSTS.

WE'LL NEGOTIATE THAT ACROSS UNIVERSITIES.

AND WE'LL GIVE THAT TO YOU TO MAKE THE GRANT POSSIBLE AND MY ACTUAL RESEARCH POSSIBLE.

NOW DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS, GATES FOUNDATION OR THE HOWARD HUGHES MEDICAL INSTITUTE DO IT DIFFERENTLY.

SOMETIMES THEY ALLOW SOME OF THOSE COSTS TO BE IN THE GRANT.

FOR EXAMPLE, I.T.

COSTS OR SPECIAL HANDLING OF SAMPLES, AND SO THEY HAVE DIFFERENT KINDS OF INDIRECT RATES.

NOW WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID IS SAY UNILATERALLY, WE'RE GOING CUT IT DOWN TO WHERE OTHERS HAVE THEIR INDIRECT RATE WITHOUT CHANGING WHAT I CAN PUT INTO MY GRANT THE WAY THOSE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AGAIN, LIKE THE GATES FOUNDATION OR THE HOWARD HUGHES FOUNDATION HAVE.

AND THAT'S A PROBLEM.

BECAUSE THERE ARE CONTRACTS, EXPECTATIONS, AND JUST SWITCHING IT OVERNIGHT -- >> IS THERE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND THAT THIS WILL AFFECT THE WELL-BEING OF AMERICANS, FOR STARTERS?

>> WELL, A LOT OF PLACES ARE ACTUALLY PATIENTS ON RESEARCH PROTOCOLS ARE HAVING TO BE STOPPED.

YOU'RE IN THE MIDST OF A CANCER TREATMENT AS PART OF RESEARCH, AND THEY'RE SAYING NO, WE CAN'T -- WE'RE NOT FUNDING THAT GRANT TO THE SAME LEVEL, OR WE'RE DOING CRITICAL EXPERIMENTS ON, YOU KNOW, PARTICULAR NEW NOVEL THERAPY, THAT'S GOING TO STOP.

NOW THIS IS MEANT TO UNDERCUT THE BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH ENTERPRISE.

WE HAVE THE WORLD'S BEST.

IT'S BUILT ON A SYSTEM, AND PART OF WHAT THIS IS DOING IS THREATENING THAT SYSTEM.

AND IT'S NOT MEANT TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT.

IT'S MEANT TO UNDERMINE AMERICA'S PREMIER LEADERSHIP IN BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH.

>> BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS HERE?

GO AHEAD.

>> SORRY.

I THINK, LOOK, CAN THERE BE REFORMS TO THE WAY WE DO RESEARCH, HOW WE FINANCE IT, WHAT WE THINK SHOULD BE COVERED?

ABSOLUTELY.

BUT UNILATERALLY SAYING I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE OLD CONTRACTS, I DON'T CARE ABOUT OUR AGREEMENTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO FUND IT IN A CERTAIN WAY.

I'M JUST CHANGING IT MYSELF THAT IS NOT A RECIPE FOR STRENGTHENING THE SYSTEM.

I THINK THE SYSTEM CAN BE REFORMED AND CAN BE STRENGTHENED, BUT THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT APPROACH.

THIS IS SLASH AND BURN RATHER THAN LET'S THINK ABOUT HOW TO IMPROVE WHAT WE'RE DOING.

>> AND TO THE REASONS AS TO WHY THEY'RE SLASHING AND BURNING, PERHAPS, A 2022 REPORT BY THE CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK THAT PUBLISHED PROJECT 2025, SOMETHING AMERICANS HAVE HEARD A LOT ABOUT, THEY CLAIMED NIH FUNDING WAS BEING USED TO SUBSIDIZE THE DEI AGENDA OF THE POLITICAL LEFT.

PRESIDENT TRUMP TRIED TO DISTANCE HIMSELF FROM PROJECT 2025.

IS THERE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND THAT THEY'RE EXECUTING ON THIS RIGHT NOW?

>> OH, NO.

THE CUTTING IN THE NIH INDIRECT WAS PART OF PROJECT 2025.

IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE PROGRAM.

>> YOU BELIEVE IT'S IDEALOGICALLY DRIVEN, THEN?

>> YEAH.

LOOK, YOU CAN SAY WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE DEI.

THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID.

AND I THINK PEOPLE HAVE HEARD THAT MESSAGE.

BUT YOU DON'T CUT INDIRECT FROM IN SOME CASES 50 OR 60% BECAUSE PLACES ARE IN HIGH RENT AND HIGH PAYROLL LOCATIONS DOWN TO 15% AND SAY THAT'S DEI.

THAT'S WAY MORE THAN DEI.

DEI MAY BE A FRACTION OF 1%.

THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DEI.

THAT IS A COVER THAT IS -- DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE KINDS OF CUTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED.

AND AMERICANS ARE GOING TO SUFFER.

WE HAVE TO BE QUITE CLEAR.

AMERICAN PATIENTS ARE GOING TO SUFFER.

FUTURE INNOVATION IS GOING TO SUFFER.

AND THE BIOTECH AND PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IS GOING TO SUFFER BECAUSE PROGRESS BEING MADE IN LABS IS GOING TO BE PREVENTED BECAUSE OF THIS.

AND THEY ARE BENEFICIARIES.

THEY GET NEW IDEAS, NEW POTENTIAL PRODUCTS FOR TESTS IN.

OUR WORLD LEADERSHIP IN BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, BIOTECHNOLOGY, PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IS REALLY THREATENED BY THIS.

>> IT'S AT STAKE.

I DO WANT TO POINT OUT HOW PERHAPS SOMEONE LOOKING FOR EFFICIENCY MAY NOT UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT'S AT STAKE WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING FOR IT, DESPITE WHAT YOU SAY IS THEY MIGHT MISTAKE IT FOR OVERHEAD THAT'S TOO EXPENSIVE WHEN REALLY IT'S NECESSARY.

BUT ALSO, THESE DRUGS LIKE OZEMPIC THAT HAVE BEEN MIRACLE DRUGS FOR WEIGHT LOSS AND HELPING WITH DIABETES AS WELL, IT CAME FROM ANALYZING THE VENOM FROM THE GILA MONSTER.

IT'S EXTRAORDINARY TO ME.

WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN TO THAT OZEMPIC RESEARCH RIGHT NOW, THAT WEGOVY RESEARCH RIGHT NOW, IF DOGE, THE DEPARTMENT OF EFFICIENCY THERE, RUN BY ELON MUSK CAME ACROSS THIS AS A LINE ITEM IN THE BUDGET IN THE NIH?

>> THEY WOULD PROBABLY -- SO LET'S REMEMBER THE GLP 1, OZEMPIC AND WEGOVY AND MOUNJARO, THE RESEARCH ON THAT STARTED IN THE EARLY 1980s.

IT'S TAKEN 40 YEARS OF WORK TO DEVELOP EFFECTIVE DRUGS, AND NOW TENS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS, NOT TO MENTION MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD ARE BENEFITTING, AND WE CONTINUE TO LEARN NEW BENEFITS.

THEY WOULD PROBABLY MAKE FUN OF THIS.

OH, WHY ARE WE LOOKING AT VENOM OF A GILA MONSTER.

THAT'S A JOKE.

BUT THIS IS HOW DISCOVERIES ARE MADE.

WE OFTEN LOOK -- I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A LOT OF INVESTIGATION OF THE HEAT VENTS IN OCEANS FOR NEW ANTIBIOTICS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THE NEXT DISCOVERY IS GOING TO COME FROM.

THAT'S WHY WE CALL IT RESEARCH.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.

THE MORE RESEARCH WE DO, THE BETTER THE CHANCES ARE WE'RE GOING TO GET BREAKTHROUGHS, AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR BREAKTHROUGHS RIGHT NOW IN ALL SORTS OF NEUROLOGICAL DISEASES THAT ARE A REAL PROBLEM FOR MILLIONS, TENS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS.

AND THAT'S THE REAL NEXT FRONTIER.

>> AND THAT COULD BE IN JEOPARDY AT THIS HOUR.

DR. ZEKE EMANUEL, WE'LL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON THIS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> NOW, AS WE JUST MENTIONED, ONE BY ONE, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS SEEN ITS EXECUTIVE ORDERS FROZEN FROM ITS CAMPAIGN TO END BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP TO THE DESTRUCTION OF USAID.

NOW A JUDGE IN RHODE ISLAND HAS BECOME THE FIRST TO DECLARE THAT THE WHITE HOUSE HAS ACTUALLY DISOBEYED A COURT ORDER WHILE VICE PRESIDENT VANCE HAS SUGGESTED THAT JUDGES DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY OVER TRUMP'S EXECUTIVE POWER.

COULD THIS SIGNAL THE START OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS?

HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR AND BLOOMBERG COLUMNIST NOAH FELDMAN JOINS WALTER ISAACSON TO BREAK IT ALL DOWN.

>> THANK YOU, PAULA.

AND NOAH FELDMAN, WELCOME TO THE SHOW.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME, WALTER.

>> YESTERDAY, A FEDERAL JUDGE SAID THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAD DEFIED THE COURT'S ORDER TO RELEASE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN GRANTS THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO GO OUT.

TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS IS.

>> IT'S STILL NOT CLEAR WHETHER THE ADMINISTRATION WAS CONSCIOUSLY DEFYING THAT ORDER OR, AS CASUALLY DEFYING IT.

I KNOW THAT MIGHT NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT IT DOES.

SINCE 1865, NO PRESIDENT HAS REFUSED TO FOLLOW A DIRECT ORDER FROM A FEDERAL COURT.

SO IF A PRESIDENT SAYS I'M DEFYING IT, THAT PUTS US CLOSER TO WHAT YOU MIGHT CALL A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.

THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS JUST DRAGGING ITS FEET AND GOES INTO COURT AND SAYS WELL, WE THOUGHT YOU MEANT A DIFFERENT ORDER, WHICH IS WHAT THEY SAID HERE.

AND THE COURT SAID NO, I TOLD YOU TO RESTART THE FUNDING.

IF THEY SAY, AS THE ADMINISTRATION HAS SAID, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO APPEAL.

WE'RE ANGRY, WE'RE GOING APPEAL.

THAT'S OKAY.

WHAT'S NOT OKAY IS TO SAY WE THE ADMINISTRATION ARE GOING TO IGNORE AN ORDER OF AN ARTICLE 3 COURT.

>> BUT LET ME READ YOU SOMETHING THAT VICE PRESIDENT J.D.

VANCE POSTED OVER THE WEEKEND, WHICH SEEMS A BIT CONCERNING.

IT WAS HE WROTE IF A JUDGE TRIED TO TELL A GENERAL HOW TO CONDUCT A LITTLETARY OPERATION, THAT WOULD BE ILLEGAL.

IF A JUDGE TRIED TO COMMAND ATTORNEY GENERAL IN HOW TO USE HER DISCRETION AS A PROSECUTOR, THAT'S ALSO ILLEGAL.

JUDGES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CONTROL THE EXECUTIVE'S LEGITIMATE POWER.

I THOUGHT THEY WERE ALLOWED TO CONTROL IT, OR IS THE WORD LEGITIMATE POWER SOMETHING I'M MISSING?

>> J.D.

VANCE IS USING WHAT LAWYERS CALL TECHNICALLY WEASEL WORDS THERE.

HE'S TRYING TO SAY SOMETHING THAT IN LITERAL LITERAL TEAMS IS SORT OF KIND OF TRUE, BUT THAT IS EXTREMELY MISLEADING IN TERMS OF THE WAY HE PHRASED IT, BECAUSE THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK, THE WAY IT DOES WORK UNDER OUR SYSTEM IS THAT IT'S UP TO THE COURTS TO SAY WHAT THE LAW IS.

AND THEN IT'S UP TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO EXECUTE THE LAW AS THE COURTS HAVE SAID IT IS.

SO IF THE COURT SAYS THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS EXCEEDED HIS EXECUTIVE POWER, THEN HE HAS, AND HE HAS TO STOP.

NOW, THERE IS A BODY OF LAW ABOUT WHEN THE PRESIDENT HAS EXCEEDED HIS EXECUTIVE POWER, AND IF A COURT WERE TO IGNORE THE WHOLE BODY OF LAW AND REACH A DECISION THAT CONTRADICTED IT, WE COULD SAY IN ORDINARY ENGLISH, THEY GOT IT WRONG.

BUT THE PRESIDENT WOULD STILL HAVE TO LISTEN TO THAT.

SO WHAT J.D.

VANCE IS DOING THERE IS HE'S MAKING IT SOUND AS THOUGH SOMEONE OTHER THAN THE COURTS COULD SAY YOU GOT IT WRONG.

SO WHAT YOU DID WAS ILLEGAL.

AND THAT'S NOT THE ORDINARY ENGLISH MEANING OF THE WORD ILLEGAL.

BUT TECHNICALLY, VANCE CAN SAY WELL, I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD DEFY THE COURT'S ORDERS, I'M SAYING THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN WRONG.

IN ORDER THE SAY THEY'RE REALLY WRONG, I USED THE WORD ILLEGAL.

SO WHAT HE IS DOING IS UNDERMINING THE LEGITIMACY OF THE PROPER SYSTEM USING WEASEL WORDS.

>> EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THE COURTS I GUESS WAY BACK WHEN JUSTICE MARSHALL DID MARBURY VERSUS MADISON GOT THE POWER TO DECIDE WHAT LAWS MEAN AND WHAT THE EXECUTIVES HAVE TO DO TO ENFORCE THEM.

>> WELL, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, WALTER, THAT THIS GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO 1803, AND ONE OF THE MOST FAMOUS SUPREME COURT CASES EVER, MARBURY AGAINST MADISON, AS YOU SAID, IN WHICH CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL SAID THE POWER OF THE COURTS IS THE POWER TO SAY WHAT THE LAW IS, EVEN WHEN THAT LAW CONTRADICTS THE CONSTITUTION.

AND THEN THEY WILL SAY IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

SO THAT'S WHY THAT'S SUCH A FAMOUS CASE.

AND BY SAYING THAT THE COURTS HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL, HE WAS ALSO SAYING WE THE COURTS HAVE THE FINAL WORD ON WHAT THE MEANING OF THE LAW IS.

AND EVERYONE ELSE IN THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO LISTEN TO US.

AND ALTHOUGH THERE HAVE BEEN ONE OR TWO MOMENTS IN OUR HISTORY, THE VERY EARLY PART OF OUR HISTORY WHERE PRESIDENTS WERE A LITTLE AMBIVALENT ABOUT LISTENING TO THE COURTS ABOUT THAT, IT'S BEEN VERY WELL ESTABLISHED, CERTAINLY SINCE THE END OF THE CIVIL WAR, AND IN EVEN CLEARER TERMS SINCE THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT THAT WHEN THE COURT SPEAKS, THAT'S THE LAW.

AND THE PRESIDENT HAS TO LISTEN THE SAME WAY PRESIDENT EISENHOWER DID WHEN HE LISTENED TO THE COURTS AND SENT AIRBORNE TROOPS TO LITTLE ROCK TO INTEGRATE THE SCHOOLS.

>> ONE OF THE PRESIDENTS THAT TRUMP REMINDS ME OF IS ANDREW JACKSON IN SOME WAYS.

AND, OF COURSE, ANDREW JACKSON FAMOUSLY SAID OF CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL AFTER THE SUPREME COURT HAD MADE THE DECISION ABOUT PREVENTING CHEROKEE INDIAN REMOVALS, HE SAID, WELL, JUSTICE MARSHALL HAS MADE HIS DECISION.

NOW LET HIM ENFORCE IT.

SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COURTS GET DEFIED?

HOW DO THEY ENFORCE IT?

>> I WILL SAY LIKE YOU, I WAS RAISED ON THAT STORY.

THERE IS NOW SOME QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER HE ACTUALLY SAID THAT.

BUT THE IDEA IS CONSISTENT NO MATTER WHAT.

THE IDEA IS THE COURTS DON'T HAVE A POLICE FORCE THAT WORKS FOR THEM.

THEY DON'T HAVE AN ARMY THAT WORKS FOR THEM.

SO IN OUR SYSTEM, THE RULE OF LAW DEPENDS ON THE PRESIDENT AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ACTUALLY OBEYING WHAT THE COURTS SAY.

THAT'S A FUNDAMENTAL FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLE OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER.

A AND THE JACKSON STORY IS THERE TO REMIND US IF A PRESIDENT DOESN'T DO THAT, WE DON'T HAVE A GREAT CHECK.

HISTORICALLY I WOULD HAVE SAID OH, YOU IMPEACH A PRESIDENT WHO DOESN'T LISTEN.

WE TRIED TO IMPEACH PRESIDENT TRUMP TWICE.

HE WAS IMPEACHED BOTH TIMES BUT NOT CONVICTED EITHER TIMES.

SO WE REALIZED IT'S NOT AS POWERFUL A TOOL AS THE FRAMERS WANTED IT TO BE.

SO WE NEED TO AVOID A SITUATION LIKE.

I WANT TO EMPHASIZE WE'RE NOT THERE.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT CAN'T HAPPEN, BUT NO ONE WISE WOULD PROPHESIZE ABOUT DONALD TRUMP.

BUT HE WAS PRESIDENT FOR FOUR YEARS IN THAT PERIOD OF TIME.

HE DID NOT DIRECTLY DEFY ANY COURT ORDERS.

SO I'M HOPEFUL THE ADMINISTRATION WON'T DO IT THIS TIME EITHER.

>> YOU WROTE THAT TRUMP NEVER REALLY DEFIED A COURT ORDER, AND YOU SAID AS YOU DID NOW, YOU'RE HOPEFUL.

WHAT MAKES YOU HOPEFUL?

>> WHAT MAKES ME HOPEFUL IS PARTLY INCENTIVES.

YOU KNOW, TRUMP APPOINTED THREE JUSTICES AT THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT, AND HE'S GOT THREE MORE WHO ARE OFTEN SYMPATHETIC TO THE CONSERVATIVE POSITION.

SO HE CAN WIN IMPORTANT CASES IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT, UNLESS HE DEFIES THE AUTHORITY OF THE JUDICIARY AS A WHOLE.

THE ONE THING ALL NINE OF THE JUSTICES HAVE IN COMMON IS THEIR IMPORTANCE, AND THEIR POWER DERIVES FROM BEING JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT.

SO IF HE FLOUTS THE JUDICIARY, HE IS FLOUTING THE JUSTICES, AND HE IS GOING TO LOSE THE SUPREME COURT.

AND THAT WOULD BE EXTREMELY UNWISE.

NOW I CAN ALMOST HEAR YOU THINKING THIS IS DONALD TRUMP.

SO WHY IS UNWISDOM A REASONABLE PREDICTOR?

AND I HEAR THAT LOUD AND CLEAR.

BUT I ALSO THINK THAT IT WOULD ENMESH THE COUNTRY IN A HUGE DEBATE WHAT WOULD PROBABLY IN PRACTICE BE A RELATIVELY SMALL MATTER, NOT THAT THE CLOSURE OF USAID IS SMALL TO THOSE WHO RECEIVE THE MONEY.

BUT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES, IT'S NOT THE HUGEST PART OF THE GOVERNMENT.

AND SO TO GET INTO A FIGHT WITH THE COURTS OVER SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND TO LOSE ALL OF HIS AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO THE JUDICIARY, WHAT I THINK EVEN FOR DONALD TRUMP WOULD BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.

>> LET ME GET TO THE VERY SPECIFIC CASE RIGHT NOW ABOUT THE FREEZING OF FEDERAL GRANTS AND FUNDS AND THE COURT ORDERING THEM TO UNFREEZE IT AND ASK AGAIN THE QUESTION OF ENFORCEMENT.

IF INDEED THEY SAY UNFREEZE THE FUNDS AND THE PRESIDENT AND HIS AGENCY HEADS DON'T SEND THE MONEY OUT, WHAT COULD HAPPEN?

I MEAN, HOW COULD THAT BE FORCED?

>> WELL, A COURT HAS A BUNCH OF TOOLS AT ITS DISPOSAL.

AND THE COURT THUS FAR USED A PRETTY GENTLE TOOL.

IT SORT OF PRODDED THE EXECUTIVE AND SAID WE TOLD YOU.

NOW DO THIS.

BUT IF THE EXECUTIVE DOESN'T LISTEN, THE COURT CAN ORDER MONETARY DAMAGES AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT.

AND IN EXTREME SITUATION, IT COULD IDENTIFY THE RELEVANT OFFICIAL AND ORDER THAT OFFICIAL INDIVIDUALLY TO CARRY OUT HIS OR HER JOB IN DISPERSING THE MONEY.

AND IF THE OFFICIAL DIDN'T DO IT, I DON'T THINK IT'S OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF POSSIBILITY THAT THE JUDICIARY COULD ISSUE AN ORDER DIRECTED AT THIS PERSON WITH THE CONSEQUENCE THE PERSON COULD BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT IF THEY DON'T FOLLOW IT, WHICH IN THEORY COULD MEAN THAT SUCH A PERSON COULD ACTUALLY BE PUT IN JAIL OR SUBJECT TO INDIVIDUAL FINES UNTIL THEY PERFORM THEIR JOB.

I HOPE IT DOESN'T COME TO THAT.

>> LET ME READ YOU SOMETHING THAT CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS SAID A FEW WEEKS AGO IN HIS END OF YEAR REPORT.

AND HE'S GOING ABOUT THE PERSON THAT WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE WATCHING WHEN THESE CASES GET TO THE COURT WHETHER HE HAS A SENSE OF INDEPENDENCE HE SAID WITHIN THE PAST FEW YEARS ELECTED OFFICIALS FROM THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM HAVE RAISED THE SPECTER OF OPEN DISREGARD FOR OPEN COURT RULINGS.

THESE DANGEROUS SUGGESTIONS, HOWEVER SPORADIC, MUST BE SOUNDLY REJECTED.

AND NOW WE'VE HEARD IN THE PAST FEW WEEKS SOME OF THE SAME SUGGESTIONS.

DO YOU THINK CHIEF ROBERTS IS INTIMATING THAT THESE THINGS HAVE TO BE SOUNDLY REJECTED?

>> I DO.

AND THE CHIEF JUSTICE CARES A LOT ABOUT THE LEGITIMACY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COURT AS A COURT.

AND IT'S BEEN HARD FOR HIM, BECAUSE THIS COURT IS SO POLARIZED, LIKE THE COUNTRY IS SO POLARIZED THAT IT'S UNDERMINED THE COURT'S LEGITIMACY.

THAT'S WHAT HE THINKS ABOUT WHEN HE WAKES UP IN THE MORNING AND BEFORE BEHE GOES TO BED AT NIGHT, PRESERVING THE LEGITIMACY OF THE INSTITUTION THAT HE'S IN CHARGE OF.

THAT SAID, HE HAS NOTE BEEN SHY ABOUT SPEAKING OUT.

AND HE DID IT IN THE FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHEN HE THOUGHT THAT TRUMP WAS QUESTIONING THE INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY.

AND IF NECESSARY, I THINK HE WOULD BE CONFIDENT TO DO IT AGAIN.

THERE IS AN INTERESTING QUIRK HERE WHICH IS THE SAME J.D.

VANCE, THE VICE PRESIDENT, WHO HAS BEEN MAKING THESE STATEMENTS THAT I THINK ARE IN INTENT AND EFFECT SUPPOSED TO UNDERMINE THE JUDICIARY, HE IS MARRIED TO A WOMAN WHO IS VERY BRILLIANT LAWYER WHO IS A LAW CLERK FOR THE CHIEF JUSTICE.

AND MY SENSE IS THAT VANCE IS PROBABLY SMART ENOUGH TO RUN THESE STATEMENTS BY HIS WIFE BEFORE HE MAKES THEM PUBLIC TO ASK IS THIS NARROWLY ENOUGH WITHIN THE TECHNICAL BUNDS OF WHAT IS LEGAL TO NOT, YOU KNOW, GET A REBUKE FROM THE COURT.

AND HE IS JUST INSIDE THE LINE RIGHT NOW.

BUT I THINK IF HE GOES FURTHER OR IF PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES, THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST FROM THE PAST THAT THE CHIEF JUSTICE WILL SPEAK OUT.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, ALL OF THE JUSTICES DO BELIEVE IN THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING THE RULE OF LAW, EVEN IF THEY DON'T AGREE WITH THE DECISION OF A LOWER COURT, AND THEY MIGHT OVERTURN IT, THEY STILL THINK IT HAS TO BE FOLLOWED UNTIL IT'S OVERTURNED.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SEEMS TO HAVE DONE IS FIRING THE DOZENS OF PROSECUTORS THAT WORKED ON THE JANUARY 6th CASES.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE CASE INVOLVING THE INSURRECTION AT CAPITOL HILL ON JANUARY 6th.

AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE HAS DEMANDED A LIST OF FBI AGENTS WHO WORKED ON THAT CASE.

TELL ME WHAT YOU MAKE OF THIS IN TERMS OF THE POLITICIZATION BOTH OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE FBI, WHICH IS A PART OF THAT DEPARTMENT.

>> IT'S BAD.

WE HAVE WORKED HARD TO MAINTAIN A TRADITION OF INDEPENDENCE IN INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION.

AND THAT MEANS THAT EMPLOYEES, ESPECIALLY CAREER EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE CAREER CIVIL SERVICE PROTECTIONS CANNOT BE RETALIATED AGAINST FOR WHOM THEY PROSECUTED, EVEN THAT PERSON WAS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WHO IS BACK IN OFFICE.

SO IF THOSE FOLKS WHO WERE FIRED WERE CAREER PEOPLE, CIVIL SERVANT PROTECTED, THEN THAT WAS UNLAWFUL, AND THEY WOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO BE REINSTATED PROVIDED THEY WANTED TO DO THAT.

IF THEY WERE PEOPLE WHO WERE APPOINTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR SPECIAL PURPOSES, THEN THEY COULD BE POTENTIALLY FIRED.

BUT, AGAIN, THE KEY POINT IS THAT WE DO NOT WANT CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION TO BECOME PERSONALIZED.

I WILL SAY JUST TO BE FAIR, IF YOU ASK THE TRUMP FOLKS, WHAT THEY'LL TELL YOU IS WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU DON'T WANT IT TO BE PERSONALIZED?

JOE BIDEN WAS THE PRESIDENT.

HE HAD DEFEATED PRESIDENT TRUMP IN ELECTION.

I GUESS THEY DON'T ADMIT THAT PART.

HE RAN AGAINST DONALD TRUMP IN AN ELECTION AND WAS GOING TO RUN AGAINST HIM AGAIN, AND HE WAS CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED BY THE SITTING PRESIDENT.

SO YOU, THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE ONES WHO POLITICIZED THIS.

SO YOU CAN HARDLY COMPLAIN ABOUT THE FIRING OF A FEW PEOPLE COMPARED TO THE PROSECUTION OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO SAY, ALTHOUGH I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT POINT OF VIEW, I HEAR IT.

IT IS THE CASE THAT'S IT HARD TO MAINTAIN NONPOLITICIZATION IF YOU PROSECUTE A FORMER PRESIDENT WHO IS ALSO A CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY.

SO IN SOME SENSE WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THE AFTERMATH OF THAT DECISION TO PROSECUTE AND THERE IS SOME BLAME TO GO AROUND.

NOT WITHSTANDING THAT I STRONGLY, STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA THAT INDIVIDUAL AGENTS OR PROSECUTORS SHOULD BE TARGETED OR FIRED.

>> BUT I MEAN, HOW DOES THAT JUSTIFY WHEN IT COMES TO THE JANUARY 6th UPRISING AND INSURRECTION THE CRIMINAL TRIALS?

IS THERE SOME ARGUMENT THAT THAT WAS A POLITICAL THING AS OPPOSE -- >> NO, NO.

I DON'T THINK THERE IS A CREDIBLE ARGUMENT.

YOU MAY HEAR IT FROM HARD-CORE TRUMP SUPPORTERS, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S CREDIBLE.

WE SAW ON TELEVISION WHAT HAPPENED ON JANUARY 6th.

THOSE TRIALS WERE PUBLIC TRIALS WITH ALL OF THE EVIDENCE BROUGHT TO BEAR, AND IT WAS VERY CLEAR WHAT FOLKS HAD DONE.

AND THOSE CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS WERE I THINK ENTIRELY LEGITIMATE AND APPROPRIATE.

AND DONALD TRUMP HAS PARDONED EFFECTIVELY ALL OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED THERE, WHICH TELLS YOU THAT HE IS THE ONE WHO IS POLITICIZING THOSE PROSECUTIONS IN RETROSPECT.

>> WE SAW A HEADLINE IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" THIS WEEK THAT WAS SOMEWHAT TAKEN ABACK BY IT.

IT SAID "TRUMP'S ACTIONS HAVE CREATED A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, SCHOLARS SAY."

YOU'RE KIND OF INDICATING YOU DON'T THINK IT'S YET A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.

TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK THE INGREDIENTS ARE FOR A REAL CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS AND HOW THAT'S BEING PLAYED OUT NOW.

>> A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS EXISTS WHEN TWO THINGS HAPPEN.

THE FIRST THING IS YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

THEY'RE STARING AT EACH OTHER, AND NO ONE KNOWS UNDER THE RULES OF THE GAME WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN NEXT.

AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE THAT A COURT ORDERS THE PRESIDENT TO DO SOMETHING.

THE PRESIDENT SAYS NO.

NOW THEY'RE STARING AT EACH OTHER, THE COURT AND THE PRESIDENT.

AND THERE IS NO WRITTEN ANSWER IN THE CONSTITUTION OF WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO RESOLVE THAT.

IT'S NOT LIKE CONGRESS CAN COME IN AS THE THIRD PLAYER AND RESOLVE IT.

WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN.

AND THE SECOND COMPONENT HAS TO BE BOTH OF THE BRANCHES STARING AT EACH OTHER ARE WILLING TO TAKE THIS ALL THE WAY TO THE END.

NEITHER IS GOING TO BLINK THE WAY, FOR EXAMPLE, RICHARD NIXON ULTIMATELY BLINKED WHEN THE COURTS REQUIRED HIM TO TURN OVER THE WATERGATE TAPES.

HE BLINKED BY HANDING OVER THE TAPES OR ALMOST ALL THE TAPES AND SUBSEQUENTLY WHEN THINGS GOT REALLY BAD, HE RESIGNED WHICH IS ANOTHER FORM OF BACKING DOWN.

SO WE DON'T HAVE THOSE TWO FACTORS RIGHT NOW.

WE COULD.

IT COULD HAPPEN.

THERE WERE MOMENTS WHEN IT SEEMED TO BE HAPPENING IN THE FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, ALTHOUGH WE GOT THROUGH THEM.

SO IT'S NOT IMPOSSIBLE THAT WE COULD COME TO A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.

BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO SAVE THOSE WORDS FOR A SITUATION WHEN THINGS ARE REALLY AT THE BRINK.

BECAUSE IF WE OVERUSE THOSE WORDS, WE'RE GOING TO DILUTE THEIR MEANING.

AND WHEN WE GET A REAL CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, AND PEOPLE LIKE ME ARE WAVING OUR ARMS AND SAYING NOW, NOW IS THE TIME EVERYONE SHOULD PAY ATTENTION, PEOPLE ARE SAYING WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

YOU'VE BEEN SAYING THERE IS A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

NOTHING BAD HAS HAPPENED.

SO MAYBE YOU'RE NOT TELLING THE TRUTH.

THOSE ARE WORDS I THINK WORTH RESERVING FOR THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN NEXT AND NEITHER SIDE SEEMS PREPARED TO BACK DOWN.

>> AND YOU DON'T FEEL WE'RE THERE YET?

>> WE'RE NOT THERE YET BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE OPEN DEFIANCE OF A JUDICIAL ORDER.

WE DON'T HAVE THE ADMINISTRATION REFUSING TO FOLLOW THE LAW.

WHAT WE HAVE IS THE ADMINISTRATION DOING A LOT OF THINGS OVER THE LAST THREE WEEKS THAT WERE UNLAWFUL, SOMETIMES ONLY IN THE TECHNICAL SENSE, BUT THEY WERE STILL UNLAWFUL, AND WE HAVE COURTS SAYING THAT'S UNLAWFUL.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

AND SO IF AT THE NEXT PHASE THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BASICALLY COMPLIES, REVAMPS THOSE PLANS, DOES THEM DIFFERENTLY, WE STARTS THE PAUSE THE WAY THEY'VE DONE IN THE FUNDING, THEN THERE WON'T HAVE BEEN A CRISIS.

AND I'M SURE WE'LL RUN INTO OTHER PROBLEMS.

THERE ARE PLENTY THINGS A PRESIDENT CAN DO THAT ARE LAWFUL BUT INCREDIBLY BAD AND INCREDIBLY FOOLISH, AND TRUMP HAS ALREADY DONE A FEW OF THEM, AND MY GUESS IS HE'LL DO MORE.

BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD OLD ORDINARY GOVERNANCE CRISIS WHEN THE PRESIDENT IS DOING THINGS THAT ARE BAD FOR THE COUNTRY.

>> PROFESSOR NOAH FELDMAN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOYING US AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME, WALTER.

>>> NEXT FOR US, TO THE FILM CAPTURING THE WIDESPREAD PROTESTS THAT SWEPT IRAN AFTER THE DEATH OF MAHSA AMINI IN 2022.

"THE SEED OF THE SACRED FIG" TELLS THE TALE OF AN INCREASINGLY PARANOID INVESTIGATOR IN TEHRAN'S REVOLUTIONARY COURT AND HOW HE, HIS WIFE AND DAUGHTERS ARE IMPACTED BY THE COUNTRY'S MASS PROTESTS AND THEIR FALLOUT.

HERE IS SOME OF THE TRAILER.

>> NOW "THE SEED OF THE SACRED FIG" WON THE SPECIAL JURY PRIZE AT THE CANNES FILM FESTIVAL AND IS NOW HEADED FOR THE OSCAR.

TALKING TALKING WITH CHRISTIANE, THE FILM'S DIRECTOR MOHAMMAD RASOULOF SPOKE ABOUT WITH THE FILM'S SUCCESS AS WELL AS THEIR OWN FLIGHT FROM IRAN.

HERE IS THEIR CONSIDERATION.

>> MOHAMMAD RASOULOF, WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

THIS IS AN EXCEPTIONALLY INTERESTING FILM THAT YOU'VE MADE.

YOU'RE ALSO OUTSIDE OF IRAN.

YOU LEFT AS YOU FINISHED SHOOTING IT.

WHY?

>> BEFORE I BEGAN MAKING THE FILM, I WAS ALREADY BEING INVESTIGATED IN THE REVOLUTIONARY COURTS DUE TO MY PREVIOUS FILMS AND MY ACTIVISM ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

I HAD ALREADY RECEIVED A FIRST SENTENCE FOR THESE REASONS, AND I CHOSE TO LEAVE IRAN WHEN IT WAS CONFIRMED I HAD TO GO TO PRISON FOR EIGHT YEARS.

SO I DECIDED TO LEAVE AND KEEP MAKING FILMS.

>> MOHAMMED, HOW DID YOU LEAVE?

AND HOW DID YOU FILM THIS?

I NOTICE ON THE CLOSING CREDITS IT SAYS "ALL FILMED IN SECRET."

HOW DID YOU FILM IT SO SECRETIVELY?

>> WHEN I WROTE THE SCRIPT, I REALIZED THAT IT WAS VERY AMBITIOUS, AND IT WAS PERHAPS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE IT.

BUT THIN I MET UP WITH MY CLOSE FRIENDS WHO WERE THE CORE OF THE CREW, AND WE SPOKE ABOUT IT, AND WE DECIDED THAT IF WE WORKED WITH A VERY SMALL CAST AND CREW AND VERY LIGHT EQUIPMENT, MAX WHAT YOU'D USE FOR A STUDENT FILM, AND IF I DIRECTED THE FILM REMOTELY, IT WOULD SEEM LIKE WE COULD COMPLETE THE FILM AND WE DID.

WHERE THE POST PRODUCTION WAS TAKING PLACE SIMULTANEOUSLY OUTSIDE OF IRAN.

SO FOR ME, EVERYTHING TOOK PLACE REMOTELY.

WHEN I DECIDED TO LEAVE IRAN, A FEW PEOPLE BEFORE HAD TOLD ME THAT IF ONE DAY YOU WERE TO DECIDE TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY, CONTACT US, AND WE'LL HELP YOU.

SO WHEN I LEFT MY HOME, I PUT A FEW THINGS INTO MY BACKPACK WITHOUT ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICES OR ID.

I LEFT MY HOME, AND I REACHED A SAFE PLACE AND CONTACTED THOSE PEOPLE WHO HELPED ME TO GET TO THE BORDER.

I GOT CLOSE TO THE BORDER.

THE FIRST TIME I ATTEMPTED TO CROSS THE BORDER AND LEAVE IRAN THERE WERE SOME PROBLEMS AND I WASN'T ABLE TO.

SO THEN I WENT TO ANOTHER BORDER CROSSING, AND THERE I WAS ABLE TO LEAVE IRAN.

AND I ENTERED A NEIGHBORING COUNTRY WHERE I CONTACTED THE GERMAN CONSUL.

SINCE MY FAMILY WAS ALREADY LIVING IN GERMANY.

WHEN THE GERMAN CONSULATE WAS ABLE TO CONFIRM MY IDENTITY, THEY HELPED ME REACH EUROPE.

MY ENTIRE JOURNEY FROM IRAN TO EUROPE TOOK 28 DAYS.

>> AND ALL FOR A FILM THAT HAS BEEN NOMINATED FOR AN OSCAR.

OBVIOUSLY, IRANIAN FILMS HAVE BEEN DOING VERY WELL ABROAD IN THE LAST MANY, MANY YEARS, BUT THIS IS AN INCREDIBLE PRICE THAT YOU ARE PAYING, EXILE, PRISON, ABUSE BY THE AUTHORITIES.

IS IT WORTH IT?

>> YOU KNOW, AS I WAS LEAVING IRAN IN THAT SECOND, I WAS ABSOLUTELY NOT THINKING WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN TO THE FILM AT THE TIME.

IN FACT, IT DIDN'T EVEN SEEM POSSIBLE THAT THE FILM COULD MAKE IT TO CANNES.

MY IDEA REALLY STARTED MATURING WHEN I WAS IN PRISON PREVIOUSLY AS A FILMMAKER.

WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?

WHAT CAN YOU DO IF YOU'RE IN PRISON?

AND WHEN I WAS THERE, I REALIZED THAT AS A FILMMAKER IMPRISONED, THE ONLY THING THAT HAPPENS IS I BECOME A VICTIM OF CENSORSHIP.

AND YOU KNOW THAT'S NOT A ROLE I WANTED TO ACCEPT.

I WOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE A ROUTE WHERE I COULD KEEP WORKING ON ALL THE STORIES AND MAKE FILMS AND ALL THE STORIES THAT HAD BEEN MATURING INSIDE MY MIND AND I THOUGHT WERE NECESSARY.

WHEN I WAS OUT OF IRAN AND THE NEWSPAPERS OF THE FILM'S ACCEPTANCE AT CANNES WAS ANNOUNCED AND I LEARNED ABOUT IT, THEN EVERYTHING SORT OF TOOK ITS OWN COURSE.

EVERYTHING DERIVED FROM THE FILM.

AND I DON'T THINK I DID ANYTHING MORE THAN FILMMAKING, REALLY.

>> BUT IT'S A VERY, VERY -- THIS FILM IS A VERY, VERY DELIBERATE CRITIQUE OF THE REGIME.

IT IS A FAMILY DRAMA, BUT IT ALSO TAKES PART IN THE CONTEXT OF A FATHER WHO HAS BEEN MADE INTO A JUDGE WHO THEN STAMPS EXECUTION ORDERS LEVELED AGAINST PEOPLE WHO PROTESTED THE DEATH OF MAHSA AMINI BACK IN 2022, THE WOMAN WHO WAS KILLED, HER SUPPORTERS SAY, BY BEING BEATEN BECAUSE OF FAILING TO WEAR THE HIJAB.

THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT SAYS SHE DIED OF A HEART ATTACK.

BUT THIS IS THE HEART OF THE FILM, AND IT DELIVERS A VERY INTENSE INTERFAMILY CONFLICT AS WELL.

WE'RE GOING TO PLAY A CLIP NOW.

>> SO MOHAMMAD RASOULOF, THE GIRLS ARE A YOUNGER GENERATION, AND THEY HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS THAN THEIR FATHER ABOUT THE REVOLUTION AND ABOUT THE REVOLUTIONARY COURTS.

TELL ME WHAT YOU ARE SAYING ABOUT IRAN TODAY WITH THIS FILM.

>> FIRST OF ALL, THE STORY OF THE FILM DERIVES FROM MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCES.

WHEN THE WOMEN LIFE FREEDOM MOVEMENT BEGAN, I WAS IN PRISON, AND THE EXPERIENCE OF THIS REVOLT FOR ME HAD TO DO WITH SEEING ITS EFFECT ON THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED INSIDE THE PRISON.

I HAD A CASUAL ENCOUNTER WITH A SENIOR PRISON OFFICIAL WHO SEEMED TO RECOGNIZE ME.

HE GOT CLOSE TO ME AND TOLD ME IN SECRET HOW EMBARRASSED HE WAS ABOUT HIMSELF AND THAT HE WAS EVEN THINKING ABOUT TAKING HIS LIFE.

THEN HE TOLD ME THAT HIS FAMILY, HIS CHILDREN KEPT CRITICIZING HIM AND ASKING HIM WHY HE COLLABORATES WITH THE SYSTEM, WITH THIS OPPRESSION.

AND HERE IS WHERE I HAD THE FIRST SPARK TO WRITE THE STORY.

BUT THEN, OF COURSE, FOR MANY YEARS, PERHAPS OVER 15 YEARS, I WAS CONSTANTLY HAVING TO DEAL WITH THE SECURITY APPARATUS, INTERROGATORS.

I WAS INTERROGATED MANY TIMES.

I WENT TO PRISON.

I WENT TO COURT.

AND I KEPT ASKING MYSELF HOW DO THESE PEOPLE BRING THEMSELVES TO WORK WITH THE SYSTEM.

BUT THIS QUESTION I HAD ABOUT THESE INDIVIDUALS AND THOSE SPECIFIC SOCIAL CONDITIONS AFTER WOMEN LIFE FREEDOM SORT OF CAME TOGETHER.

AND THEN WHEN I CAME OUT OF PRISON, I WATCHED THESE TERRIFYING VIDEOS THAT THE PROTESTERS THEMSELVES HAD FILM ODD TELEPHONE OPPRESSION.

AND I NOTICED HOW INSPIRING THESE YOUNG PEOPLE AND ESPECIALLY THESE YOUNG WOMEN ARE.

AND SO I DECIDED TO TELL A FAMILY STORY THAT CAN TAKE ON A WIDER DIMENSION.

AND I WAS VERY MUCH INFLUENCED BY THE YOUNG GENERATION.

I'M VERY MUCH INFLUENCED BY THE YOUNG GENERATION IN IRAN.

>> WELL, AGAIN, THIS FAMILY DEVOLVES INTO A CONCLUSION THAT IS QUITE SHOCKING, AND I'M NOT GOING TO DO A SPOILER BECAUSE IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT.

AND I WANT TO ASK YOU, BECAUSE IT'S ALL WRAPPED UP IN THE TITLE OF THE FILM, "THE SEED OF THE SACRED FIG" REFERS TO A TREE IN WHICH THE YOUNG SHOOTS CHOKE OFF THE OLDER TRUNK.

SO THAT'S REALICISMABLISM.

>> YES.

AS I WROTE THIS STORY, I UNCONSCIOUSLY SORT OF BY CHANCE REMEMBERED ABOUT THE STORY OF THIS TREE.

THAT IN POPULAR BELIEF IN THE SOUTH OF IRAN IS KNOWN AS A SACRED TREE THAT PEOPLE HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR.

AND I THOUGHT THE STORY OF THE LIFE CYCLE OF THE TREETREE VER INTERESTING, BECAUSE IT'S AS IF THERE IS A STORY THAT CAME OUT OF NATURE ITSELF THAT HAS ALL THESE METAPHORICAL AND SYMBOLIC SIDES.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE STORY OF THE TREE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF EACH DIFFERENT CHARACTER IN THE FILM, YOU'LL DERIVE A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION.

AND SO I THOUGHT ALL THESE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF IT WERE REALLY INTERESTING.

>> AND, AGAIN, WATCHING IT AND WATCHING WHAT AN AUTHORITARIAN, CORRUPT DICTATORSHIP DOES EVEN TO A FAMILY, AND FORCES THEM TO -- OR AT LEAST THE FATHER TO START INTERROGATING HIS OWN FAMILY MEMBERS, THE WHOLE SITUATION BECOMES PARANOID AND SURVEILLANCE, EVEN WITHIN FAMILIES.

WHAT DO YOU WANT YOUR VIEWERS OUTSIDE OF IRAN TO TAKE AWAY FROM THIS?

>> YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE MODERN HISTORY OF IRAN.

I HEARD THAT SO MANY PEOPLE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE REVOLUTION WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE REVOLUTION AND WHO WERE VERY IDEOLOGICAL DID THE MOST VIOLENT ACTIONS AGAINST PEOPLE IN THEIR OWN FAMILIES, AGAINST THEIR OWN RELATIVES.

THEY SENTENCED TO DEATH THEIR OWN CHILDREN AND SO ON, AND THIS ALWAYS STAYED WITH ME.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I HAD THIS IDEA THAT WITH THIS FINALE, IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO SHOW HOW SUBMISSION TO POWER LEADS TO EXTREMISM.

AND HOW EXTREMISM IN TURN LEADS TO VIOLENCE.

>> AND GIVEN THE VIOLENCE AND GIVEN WHAT'S HAPPENED TO YOU IN THE PAST AND THAT YOU'RE IN EXILE NOW, DO YOU THINK YOU'LL EVER GO BACK TO IRAN?

CAN YOU MAKE FILMS AGAIN THERE?

>> YOU KNOW, I THINK NOT ONLY MYSELF, BUT ALL THE IRANIANS WHO ARE FORCED TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY BECAUSE OF THIS TOTALITARIANISM REGIME ARE READY TO RETURN TO THEIR COUNTRY, TO IRAN IN ANY SECOND.

A AND THE TRUTH IS THAT I'M CONSTANTLY WAITING FOR THAT MOMENT.

I KEEP CHECKING THE NEWS, AND I KNOW THAT I'M PREPARED EVEN IF NOTHING IMPROVES, OR IF THINGS FOR ME IN IRAN WERE NOT READY, LET'S SAY, FOR MY RETURN, I WOULD STILL RETURN.

IT REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW WELL I CAN WORK ON THE STORIES INSIDE MY HEAD AT THE MOMENT.

AND BECAUSE I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN MAKING MORE FILMS, AND ONCE I'VE MADE THEM, I'M READY TO GO BACK TO IRAN AND PAY ANY PRICE THAT IS NECESSARY.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK THE ONLY WAY AHEAD IS TO PAY A PRICE FOR US INSIDE IRAN.

>> WELL, MOHAMMAD RASOULOF, THANK YOU SO MUCH, INDEED, FOR JOINING US.

"THE SEED OF THE SACRED FIG."

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>> AND FINALLY FOR US, COLORFUL COSTUMES, ELABORATE MASKS, AND A DANCING CUCUMBER.

CARNIVAL SEASON HAS KICKED OFF IN LATIN AMERICA.

IN BOLIVIA, A FIGURE REPRESENTING THE SPIRIT OF CARNIVAL, KNOWN AS THE PEPINO, OR CUCUMBER WAS PARADED THROUGH THE STREETS IN THE CASKET IT'S BEEN SLEEPING IN FOR A YEAR.

NOW BEFORE BEING WOKEN UP BY A KISS FROM THE QUEEN OF THE CARNIVAL, MARKING THE BEGINNING OF THE FESTIVE SEASON.

>>> AND THAT'S IT FOR OUR PROGRAM TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT'S COMING UP ON THE SHOW EACH NIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.ORG/AMANPOUR.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING "AMANPOUR & CO." JOIN US AGAIN TOMORROW NIGHT.