Interview With California Congressman Eric Swalwell
SCIUTTO: We are back now with our politics lead. The Supreme Court ruled today that portions of President Trump's travel ban will stay in place, that is, until the court takes up the case in full in the fall. Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell of California. He serves on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees. Thank you, Congressman, for joining us today.</s>REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D), CALIFORNIA: My pleasure, Jim. Thanks for having me back.</s>SCIUTTO: Congressman, as you know, the ruling states that the ban will take effect when it comes to -- quote -- I want to quote from the ruling here -- "for nationals who lack any bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States." In your view, does this ruling make clear exactly who qualifies and who doesn't?</s>SWALWELL: No, Jim. I disagree, respectfully, with the ruling. I still believe it is a Muslim ban. And I look forward to it getting a full hearing in front of the full court in the fall, and hopefully resolution very soon.</s>SCIUTTO: Were you surprised that none of the court's, if we could describe it that way, more liberal justices did not make their dissent clear in this decision, in effect, let part of it take effect now before ruling on it in the fall?</s>SWALWELL: Well, Jim, this was not a full hearing, and it was really just to see if the stay should remain in place. And so I do hope that that is considered, especially the president's own words, which, by his words, it's a Muslim ban, by his owns, it's a travel ban. I also just want to say it makes us less safe and it makes it less us, less safe, because countries who we need cooperation from to fight terrorism are going to be affected. It perpetuates the myth that the United States is not welcoming to Muslims. And less us, just because we're a country that opens arms to refugees. And we're turning away from that if we continue to allow a policy like this to go forward.</s>SCIUTTO: You mentioned refugees specifically. But make the case to the American people. Why should people who have no tie here, whether it be, for instance, an example given is a student visa to go to university or a family member here, if they don't have such a tie, why the expectation that they should be allowed into the country?</s>SWALWELL: Yes, Jim, first, any person who comes here should go through full security vetting. And there is no evidence that that is not happening right now. And if there's places we could toughen it, that's great. But every country in the world has a responsibility, when your neighbor or other countries in the world have violence or an environment where people are not safe to open arms, and welcome them. We've done that before with Vietnamese refugees and countries have done that around the world. It just makes you a good neighbor. And, certainly, we don't want anyone who has -- if you can't find out a full security background on this person, then I don't think they should be able to come here. But I think it sends a bad message to countries that have taken on refugees that we want you to cooperate with us, but we're not going to be a team player when people are fleeing violence or just trying to, you know, bring their families here for safety.</s>SCIUTTO: You're a former prosecutor. Are you surprised that the president's public statements, prior public statements were not, it appears, factored in to the decision here?</s>SWALWELL: I hope they're factored in when the full decision is considered, because when you look too intent, there is no better way to decipher it than somebody's own words, and we know the president and Rudy Giuliani and others have, you know, said that this is a Muslim ban. And what concerns me is a blanket ban will really just peddle this belief that Muslims are violent people by nature. It draws no distinguish between the 99 percent of Muslims who are peaceful and 1 percent just as you have in every religion who would carry out violence. And that is actually something that makes us less safe.</s>SCIUTTO: Congressman, don't go anywhere. You're a lawmaker, of course, who's investigating Russian interference in the election. Did the Obama administration wait too long to respond? We're going to get to that when we come back.