'This Week' Transcript 2-22-26: U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer & Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro

A rush transcript of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" airing on Sunday, February 22 on ABC News is below. This copy may not be in its final form, may be updated and may contain minor transcription errors. For previous show transcripts, visit the "This Week" transcript archive.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARTHA RADDATZ, ABC “THIS WEEK” CO-ANCHOR: The Supreme Court deals a major blow to President Trump's signature economic policy on tariffs. So, what does it mean for you? "THIS WEEK" starts right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And I'm ashamed of certain members of the court. Absolutely ashamed.

RADDATZ: The Supreme Court invalidates Trump's sweeping tariffs, but the president refuses to back down.

TRUMP: Their decision is incorrect, but it doesn't matter because we have very powerful alternatives.

RADDATZ: Trump imposes a new 15 percent across the board tariff, injecting fresh uncertainty into global markets, while some business owners celebrates the court's ruling.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The rush of relief was really quite overwhelming.

RADDATZ: This morning, we break down the decision, what it means for the economy, global trade, and what comes next. We’ll speak with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

And, picking on Trump.

GOV. JOSH SHAPIRO (D-PA): I wish he would just adhere to the Supreme Court's ruling and stop the pain for the American people.

RADDATZ: We're one-on-one with Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, discussing the president's tariffs and immigration policies, as his party looks for momentum in the midterms.

If there's a surge of ICE agents into Pennsylvania, what do you do?

SHAPIRO: We are prepared.

RADDATZ: And nuclear ultimatum.

TRUMP: They must make a deal. Bad things will happen if it doesn't.

RADDATZ: President Trump pushes Iran for a nuclear deal, as U.S. military forces amass for possible strikes. Ian Pannell is live in the region.

Plus, our roundtable with results from our brand new poll, just two days before President Trump's State of the Union.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: From ABC News, it's "THIS WEEK." Here now, Martha Raddatz.

RADDATZ: Good morning and welcome to "THIS WEEK."

It was a major blow to President Trump's signature policy of sweeping tariffs and a rare rebuke from the Supreme Court. On Friday, in a stunning 6-3 ruling, the court overturned 70 percent of Trump's tariffs, which have upended the global economy and created uncertainty for businesses and consumers. The president fuming and calling the decision a disgrace, has now turned to a provision in the law never before used by a president, to declare a new across the board 15 percent tariff on all nations. But that only works temporarily.

This comes just two days before the president delivers his State of the Union with members of the Supreme Court presumably there in the front row. And it comes as our brand-new ABC News/"Washington Post"/Ipsos poll shows the American public largely critical of the Trump presidency. Trump's disapproval rating now stands at 60 percent, the highest of his second term, and the same as when he left office in the wake of January 6th.

And majorities of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of key issues, including the economy, immigration, tariffs and inflation. We will get to all of that, but we begin with our chief White House correspondent Mary Bruce on the Supreme Court's bombshell decision.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My fellow Americans, this is Liberation Day.

MARY BRUCE, ABC NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice over): This week the president's signature economic policy --

TRUMP: Thank God for tariffs.

My favorite word is tariff.

Tariff is the greatest thing that's happened to this country.

BRUCE (voice over): Dealt a staggering blow by the Supreme Court, declaring most of his sweeping tariffs, illegal.

TRUMP: The Supreme Court's ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing.

BRUCE (voice over): Leading to a presidential tirade in the White House Briefing Room. Trump attacking the justices who ruled against him.

TRUMP: They also are a, frankly, disgrace to our nation, those justices.

They're very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution.

BRUCE (voice over): The three liberal justices on the court were joined by the conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, and two of Trump's own appointees, Neal Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

REPORTER: Do you regret nominating them?

TRUMP: I don't want to say whether or not I regret. I think their decision was terrible.

I think it's an embarrassment to their tariffs.

BRUCE (voice over): Trump had imposed tariffs by invoking emergency powers. But the high court found he exceeded his authority, said only Congress has the power to impose taxes.

Justice Gorsuch writing, “most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people, including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs, are funneled through the legislative process for a reason.”

Some business owners who brought the case against the administration, celebrating.

VICTOR SCHWARTZ, V.O.S. SELECTIONS FOUNDER: If I could pull a metaphor from the Olympics that we’re all watching now, it’s -- I imagine it's like winning the gold medal.

BRUCE (voice over): "THIS WEEK" caught up with Maryland’s Barton O’Brian last April as the tariffs pinched his pet supply business.

BARTON O'BRIEN, BAYDOG OWNER: We have $150,000 worth of dog harnesses sitting in our factory right now. And with the current 145 percent tariff, I’m actually better off just lighting that on fire and taking the loss than I am trying to bring it into the country.

BRUCE (voice over): After the ruling, Barton telling us his relief was short-lived.

O’BRIEN: We all expected this. The tariffs were clearly illegal. But that didn't last very long because, you know, within a matter of minutes the administration said they're going to use other methods to put more tariffs on. We don't know what that's going to look like.

BRUCE (voice over): The president wasting no time doubling down, announcing he’ll use other authorities to get around the court's decision, and impose even more tariffs.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Today I will sign an order to impose a 10 percent global tariff under Section 122, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged.

BRUCE (voice over): Less than 24 hours later, the president upping those tariffs to 15 percent. But those can only stand for 150 days, with Congress required to approve any extension. That decision causing uncertainty across the globe as countries grapple with the new tariff landscape.

TRUMP: Thank you very much, everybody.

BRUCE (voice over): And prepare for what other tariffs Trump may issue in the future.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RADDATZ: And our thanks to Mary. She will be back with us in just a moment.

But we want to get straight to the Trump administration’s U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

Thanks for joining us this morning, Mr. Ambassador.

We know the president is imposing these 15 percent tariffs across the board around the world, but President Trump had said, if the Supreme Court struck down his tariffs we would be “screwed” and it would be the “biggest threat in history to United States national security” and that we would be “financially defenseless.

How do you see that?

U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE JAMIESON GREER: Well, first of all, thank you for having me on.

And the president addressed this in his press conference on Friday. And he said that since we were looking at this and the possibility of having this tool removed, we had to look at backup plans. And we found ways to really reconstruct what we’re doing. Now, it doesn’t have the same flexibility that the president had under the previous authority that he was using, but it gives us very durable tools. It allows us to do investigations, implement tariffs where needed, and provides a lot of leverage and a lot of protection for American industry.

RADDATZ: Well, the president said on Friday also that despite his anger over the decision, “it made a president’s ability to both regulate and impose tariffs more powerful.”

If that is the case, why didn’t he choose that to begin with?

GREER: It mostly had to do with needing to act very quickly. The statute we were using was an emergency statute. And the president selected to use it because of the huge expanse of the -- in the trade deficit, a 40 percent expansion under President Biden. He came in. He needed to move very quickly. He did. Trading partners came to the table right away. They opened their markets to us. We imposed tariffs.

Now we’re in a situation that we have these deals. We can reconstruct what we need. We can reconstruct our half of the deal with Section 301, Section 232, which are other tariff authorities with clear designations of authority that we can put in place and keep for as long as needed to resolve the problems that we discover.

RADDATZ: But there’s so much he cannot do. I mean the emergency act allowed him to impose tariffs as large as he want, as little as he want, for as long as he wanted. So, how in the world is this more powerful according to the president?

GREER: Because both the majority and the dissents, and everyone recognized that IEEPA, even though it might not allow the president to charge a fee, it allows him to fully embargo countries, it allows him to ban conduct with -- you know, financial and commercial contact with certain individuals or other problems arising from issues happening overseas. So, it really clarified what you can and can’t do under IEEPA and crystalized that and made it clear that he can take those actions.

Now, many presidents have taken those kinds of actions over the year, but now we have the Supreme Court coming out and saying, the president has the authority to have full embargos, which is much more powerful than a tariff.

RADDATZ: The 50 percent tariffs, of course, will expire at the end of July. That’s about three months before the midterms. So, what does President Trump do at the end of that period with midterms looming that have to be on his mind? He comes out and extends it? He comes out and announces more?

This is not popular with the American people. In our latest poll, two-thirds of Americans are not happy with the tariffs.

GREER: Well, the president's been campaigning on tariffs and protecting American industry for many years, and he does what he says. He delivers on his promises.

And so, the policy hasn't changed. The legal tool to implement it, that might change, but the policy hasn't changed. And so, we're aiming for continuity.

There's a 15 percent tariff now. It's roughly equivalent to the types of tariffs that we had in place under IEEPA. As this tool expires, I'm going to be conducting Section 301 investigations. The Commerce Department has existing tariffs under Section 232.

A lot of tariffs are still in place. The reality is we want to maintain the policy we have, have as much continuity as possible. Make sure that business understands this is the -- you know, this is the direction we've been going. We're going to continue going this way.

And there's been a throughline to President Trump, Biden, and President Trump again, that we're going to have tariffs. We'll have tariffs on China. We'll protect U.S. industry.

It's actually not as big a change as people might think that it is.

RADDATZ: I know you're looking at Section 301, 232. This includes a threat to national security, violating U.S. rights under trade agreements that may be unreasonable or unjustified.

How do you decide what to pursue as a national security interest? Furniture doesn't seem like a national security interest. Lumber -- how do you decide that?

GREER: So, the Commerce Department is looking at this, and they already have in place, as you mentioned, protective tariffs on things like steel and aluminum. Those are tariffs that have been in place again since 2018. President Biden kept them in place. There are tariffs on autos.

Anything involving manufacturing, frankly, can have -- can really feed into the ecosystem we need to have security. I think we all found out during the pandemic that even things like textiles, people thought this isn't a big deal, but we have to have personal protective equipment for our hospitals. We have to have uniforms for our military. You know, I don't think we're doing national security action on textiles.

But I just pointed out that things that people might think are ho-hum commodities, they actually become quite strategic when it comes to national security. So, whether it's -- you know, lumber for housing or cars and the factories and the ecosystem that go along with them for transportation, these are the types of things we need to have a strong economy, have a strong industrial base to prepare us for times of war and other things.

RADDATZ: Sounds like a pretty wide net there. Are there any countries you're specifically investigating at this point? You talk about these investigations.

GREER: So, we have open Section 301 investigations of Brazil and China. We expect to be initiating investigations related to things like industrial excess capacity. This will cover a lot of these countries in Asia that that have over capacity. They make more than they can consume and they crush prices throughout the world because they -- they're not following basic economics. They're just building factories to build them and keep people employed.

RADDATZ: You --

GREER: We're looking at unfair trading practices and things like rice overseas, where people have lots of subsidies and they -- they kill our rice farmers here.

So, there are things all over the board that we're looking at right now.

RADDATZ: And -- and you mentioned China. President Trump has a meeting with China's President Xi next month, where the president has used the threat of bigger, larger, huge tariffs over the last year.

So how does he approach Xi this time? Does he just leave these lower tariffs in place, or does he use China, as an example?

GREER: Well, right now, everyone -- we've replaced the tariffs that were struck down by the Supreme Court with a 15 percent tariff. That applies globally. It doesn't single out any country. It's 15 percent globally.

Going into this meeting, the purpose of the meeting with President Xi, it's not to -- it's not to fight about trade. It's to maintain stability, make sure that the Chinese are holding up their end of our deal and buying American, you know, agricultural products and Boeings and other things.

And making sure they're sending us the rare earth that we need. It's really about monitoring that agreement. If there are places for additional agreement, we'll find them, and developing the presidents' relationship with each other.

So, I don't see this really affecting that meeting.

RADDATZ: And I want to ask you about refunds. It's estimated that the tariffs raised $142 billion in revenue through the end of last year. Will you refund the money immediately or wait for a court order?

GREER: Well, we need the court to tell us what to do. They've created a situation where they struck down the tariffs and gave zero guidance on this.

Historically, you know, as a trade attorney, in my experience, courts will normally give you some instruction on what to do.

When the Court of International Trade, which is a district level U.S. court, my expectation is that they'll have to step in and give some direction on -- on how they want that to be done, if at all, whether plaintiffs had to have made a claim or not. We just need to have guidance from the court.

RADDATZ: Okay. Thanks for joining us this morning, Mr. Ambassador. We appreciate it.

GREER: Thank you, Martha.

RADDATZ: And to help us analyze the political, economic, and legal fallout from the Supreme Court's decision, our chief White House correspondent, Mary Bruce, is back with us; ABC's Elizabeth Schulze, who covers the economy; and SCOTUSBlog editor Sarah Isgur.

Welcome to you all.

And, Mary, the president, you just heard the trade rep there, but the president was clearly fuming about this. He does not have enough tools, the same tools that he had before. Why was he surprised about this given what he said?

MARY BRUCE, ABC NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean, look, this was a rare rebuke by the court. The president isn't used to losing and he certainly doesn't like it. And we saw that in the Briefing Room. I mean, the president was furious. He railed against the justices in very personal terms. I mean he called them fools and lap dogs without evidence. He accused them of being swayed by foreign interference.

And look, this is a president who expects loyalty from the court, and certainly from his appointees. And he now is having to come to terms with the reality and the limits of his presidential power in a way that, you know, he certainly isn't accustomed to. And it will certainly be interesting on Tuesday night when he comes face-to-face with those limits, when he's facing the justices, although he did say he doesn't care if they show up or not.

RADDATZ: And, Sarah, from a legal standpoint, listening to oral arguments back in November, this really shouldn't have been a shock.

SARAH ISGUR, EDITOR AT SCOTUSBLOG & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: No, this is the most consequential case on presidential power that we’ve probably had in decades. But it also is in line with what they've said before. Presidents trying to use vague emergency powers delegated by Congress simply are going to lose at the court. Biden's student loan debt forgiveness, Trump trying to send the National Guard to Chicago, and now tariffs. The court saying, Congress needs to get in the game. Presidents cannot do the job of Congress by themselves.

RADDATZ: And, Elizabeth, my takeaway from what the trade representative just said is those refunds aren't coming until there’s a court order.

ELIZABETH SCHULZE, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Not anytime soon. He made pretty clear, Jamieson Greer, that it's going to take an order from the international court, trade court, to basically say what's going to happen to those refunds. Keep in mind, we are talking about 300,000 importers that have paid those tariffs. We've already seen lawsuits from companies like Costco and small businesses trying to get that money back. But basically now it's going to take some time for that to play out. As small businesses, it's going to take longer for them to figure out that process. They often don't have those resources. And basically what it comes down to when it comes to those refunds, short-lived elation, temporary relief, not going to happen right now.

RADDATZ: And, Sarah, if these new tariffs, as we know, this 15 percent, go into effect, then they -- they’d have to redo it at the end of July, how legally sound is all this?

ISGUR: So, Trump's new tariff authority is really two different things. One is limitations in what he can tariff and the other is limitations on how long he can tariff. Now, remember, we've seen in the TikTok example that he will sometimes just ignore those congressionally set deadlines. The difference here is that if he tries to extend them unlawfully, I think we will see a lot more lawsuits coming back around.

RADDATZ: Mary, I want to go back to China and asking him about the trip.

BRUCE: Yes.

RADDATZ: He’s going to China. President Trump’s going to China next month. This really changes things. First of all, he goes into China as a loser on this.

BRUCE: Yes, it changes everything. I mean, the president has now lost that main pressure point. He has been using these tariffs, or the threat of tariffs, with China and with others around the world as a point of leverage to get what he wants. And, you know, Jamieson Greer there, and we've heard from the administration in recent days, are certainly trying to downplay the impacts of this decision. They are insisting, you know, they will be able to have this continuity. Although you heard Jamieson Greer there say they will have less flexibility. The president has conceded this will be more complicated.

RADDATZ: There’s lot of hidden things in those answers. Yes.

BRUCE: Yes. Yes. This isn’t easy. But he now goes into China in that trip next month, you know, of course, defeated by the court. And it certainly, I think, will embolden China. They will feel that -- more confident going into these meetings. And as you heard Greer say, you know, they want to make sure that they are seeing these deals followed through. Well, how do you do that when you've lost that main pressure point upon which so much was hinging?

RADDATZ: And, Elizabeth, we have just a few seconds here, but I want you to talk about what this means for consumers.

SCHULZE: Yes. I think it's really important to keep in mind, a lot of businesses have absorbed the costs of these tariffs. They’ve tried to take them on, whether that means taking on more debt, laying off workers. But, at the same time, costs have been passed down. All of the tariffs combined, including the Supreme Court ones that were struck down, were about $1,600 per household on average according to the Yale Budget Lab. Even with the tariffs gone, including the new ones that the president just announced, we’re still looking at about $1,300 per year per typical household. That is a significant cost when we think about how budgets are already stressed with (INAUDIBLE).

RADDATZ: And we’re still looking at a lot of uncertainty no doubt.

Thanks for joining us this morning, all of you.

Coming up, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro was at the White House when the Supreme Court's tariff decision came down. He’ll explain how President Trump reacted when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RADDATZ: Many of the nation's governors gathered in Washington, D.C. this week for the National Governors Association winter meeting, including Pennsylvania's Josh Shapiro, who is out with a new book, "Where We Keep the Light: Stories from a Life of Service."

I spoke with Governor Shapiro shortly after he attended a White House breakfast meeting Friday with President Trump and he was in the room with the president when the Supreme Court ruled against his tariff policy.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GOV. JOSH SHAPIRO (D), PENNSYLVANIA: He was going on and on about other topics, and an aide interrupted him, handed him a note. He read the note, he asked the aide if that meant, I think he said, "We lost?", as a question. The aide nodded in affirmation. He called it a disgrace. And I think he took one more question from a governor and then moved on.

Look, I think the disgrace, frankly, is what he's done to our farmers in Pennsylvania, the way he's hurt consumers. Now it looks like he's going to try and make an end around, which is only going to create more chaos and higher costs for the American people.

RADDATZ: So let's talk about the end around. He's talked about this Section 122. What does it mean? Do you think he can do it?

SHAPIRO: I think there's real legal questions. And look, we've seen now that the president was acting outside his legal authority. By the way, not a new thing for him, as someone who's had to take him to court 19 times as governor.

The thing about the tariffs is he's doing it in a way that is hurting the American people, hurting our farmers, hurting consumers, hurting our small businesses. We know that. By the way, the president knows that. That's why he offered a bailout to our farmers. He acknowledged the fact that his policies are hurting Pennsylvanians, hurting Americans.

I wish he would just adhere to the Supreme Court's ruling and stop the pain for the American people.

RADDATZ: I want to touch on foreign policy. I know you're a governor, but it's important to everybody in the country. You've seen this massive buildup in the Middle East. The president threatening to strike Iran. Would you support that?

SHAPIRO: I'd want to know what the president's goals are. I'd want to know what his objectives are. But the only thing we know now, thanks to reporting from you and others, is that there's been this massive buildup of military assets in the region.

Look, we know the Iranians. These are the bad guys. These are the folks that are -- these are the people who are the largest exporter of terrorism around the globe. You will find no sympathy from me when it comes to the Iranians. But what I want to see from our commander-in-chief is clear purpose, clear intentions, clear directives, and I think he owes the American people that answer before engaging in military action.

RADDATZ: Let's talk about the state of the Democratic Party right now. You said that November's election needs to be a referendum on President Trump, and that Democrats need to focus on reigning in the excesses, the chaos, the cruelty, the lawlessness of this administration. So what exactly is the pitch on how Democrats should do that?

SHAPIRO: I've called for a national referendum on these chaotic, cruel and corrupt policies of the Trump administration. Show up, vote in record numbers, and if you do, it is likely we'll not only re-elect a bunch of Democratic governors who are holding the line here and

protecting the rule of law, but we're very likely, and by the way, maybe even just in Pennsylvania, with our competitive congressional seats, to flip the balance of power in Congress.

That accomplishes two things. Number one, it stops the cruel policies from passing through the Congress of the United States, and number two, Congress finally, will ultimately act as a check on this administration, as is their constitutional obligation.

RADDATZ: People in the past have focused on Donald Trump and what he's doing. What are the Democrats going to do that's different? What is that message?

SHAPIRO: I think it's how I'm governing in Pennsylvania, how other Democratic governors are governing. Let me focus on my Commonwealth.

We've invested in our schools, in safety, and economic opportunity, and we've done so in a way that protects people's fundamental rights and freedoms. We haven't engaged in cruelty designed to attack a specific person based on what they look like or where they come from, who they love, who they pray to. That's the kind of governing that we're showing in -- by the way, the swingiest of all swing states in the country, a state that has a divided legislature, one U.S. senator that's a Democrat, one that's a Republican, a divided congressional delegation.

RADDATZ: “The New York Times” ran a story last week that said, "Why Pennsylvania's two most powerful Democrats don't speak?" Is that true?

SHAPIRO: Yeah, that's not true. And I guess journalists sometimes want to conjure up a lot of drama.

RADDATZ: How would you describe your relationship with Fetterman? Do you speak?

SHAPIRO: We have a constructive relationship to try and ensure that the people of Pennsylvania are served.

He and I are obviously different people. He casts some votes and takes some positions that I strongly disagree with, but at the end of the day, my job is to serve the people of Pennsylvania.

RADDATZ: Would you support him if he seeks re-election?

SHAPIRO5: Well, he has to decide if he's seeking re-election. That's not for another cycle.

RADDATZ: It's not for another cycle, but --

SHAPIRO: I don't know if he's running for reelection. I think he needs to decide if he's running, and then we'll make a decision from there.

RADDATZ: You'll make a decision once he decides. So, you haven't decided yet whether --

SHAPIRO: Well, he needs to decide if he’s --

RADDATZ: --you're going to support him.

SHAPIRO: He needs to decide if he's running for re-election, and then we'll make a determination thereafter.

RADDATZ: Tom Homan -- he took over in Minnesota, as you know, and he's now saying it will be different than it was with Greg Bovino. They will do these targeted raids against people they know that are there, that they think are there illegally or have committed a crime.

SHAPIRO: To me, it's less important who's in charge. What's more important is that these individuals are being sent out on what I think are compromised and unconstitutional missions, as we saw in Minneapolis.

The direction’s coming from the President of the United States.

RADDATZ: If there's a surge of ICE agents into Pennsylvania, what do you do?

SHAPIRO: We are prepared. I will tell you, governors prepare for all kinds of emergencies -- for a weather emergency or, God forbid, a terrorist incident or a shooting, awful things like that. We are now preparing, should the federal government, against our will, deploy federal officials into our communities.

It was interesting in the governor's meeting, one of the governors asked the president, what did you learn from Minnesota and what happened there? And the president said, in the way he says things, I learned we're only going to go to places where we're wanted, where people say please and thank you.

We do not want that kind of chaos in our communities in Pennsylvania, so don't come. But if you come, we are prepared to address it.

RADDATZ: Our latest ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll found that 70 percent of Democrats support abolishing ICE. Do you support abolishing ICE?

SHAPIRO: I think what's clear is that ICE is not working. What's clear is that they've been engaged in unconstitutional practices, and that needs to be fixed. I think the first step is what the Congress of the United States is doing right now to try and put some controls on that, and I want to see those controls be put into effect. Again, I’m not --

RADDATZ: But controls, not abolish.

SHAPIRO: I'm not going to get caught up in labels here. It's what I said to you --

RADDATZ: It's not a label, really. It's, do you get rid of them all together, or do you try to do it better?

SHAPIRO: I think what is clear is that the manner in which they are being directed is a manner that directs them to go violate people's constitutional rights, and that is not something I support.

RADDATZ: A theme of your book is that there's more uniting us in this country than dividing us.

SHAPIRO: Yeah.

RADDATZ: What's uniting us?

SHAPIRO: I know it doesn't feel that way, and I actually set out to write this book to speak to the goodness that Lori -- my wife, Lori, and I see every day as we travel across Pennsylvania, that the people who maybe despite some political differences, are united in our communities. And in the middle of that, in the middle of writing this book about all the light that emanates from the people that I meet, darkness landed on our doorstep with that attack at the residence. But from that, we saw extraordinary light of people coming together of different faiths and praying for us.

When you actually get out, particularly in my state, you find people from all different walks of life, all different faiths who have that shared humanity, that light, that goodness. That's what I want people to take away from this book.

RADDATZ: Our thanks to Governor Shapiro. Up next, with a massive U.S. military buildup near Iran, will President Trump launch strikes to try to force Iran to make a nuclear deal? We'll have the latest from the region when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAREN TRAVERS, ABC NEWS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: You said today on Iran, bad things will happen if Iran doesn't make a deal -- what will that mean?

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I'm not going to tell you about that.

TRAVERS: OK. Can you explain, though, what is the goal if there is a U.S. military strike?

TRUMP: We want to make a deal. We are going to get a deal one way or the other.

TRAVERS: But with a military strike, is it to wipe out their nuclear program?

TRUMP: I am not going to talk to you about that. But we are either going to get a deal or it's going to be unfortunate for them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RADDATZ: ABC's Karen Travers pressing the president about his plans for potential military action on Iran. For the very latest, let's go overseas to ABC's Chief Foreign Correspondent, Ian Pannell, in the region. And Ian, you heard the president there just break down what the U.S. could be preparing for here. This is a massive build-up.

IAN PANNELL, ABC NEWS CHIEF FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, absolutely huge. I mean, you now have the largest assembly of U.S. Forces in the Middle East that we've seen in years. You have two aircraft carrier strike groups, more than a hundred cargo planes, refueling tankers, fighter jets, multiple bases and we think something in the region of 35,000 U.S. Troops across the Middle East.

Now, the president has said repeatedly that he prefers a diplomatic solution. But now, he also says he is considering a limited strike to try to force Iran into making a nuclear deal. Frankly, it remains an open question how successful that would be. Iran is insistent that it wants a negotiated solution, but while saying is prepared for peace, it's also stressing it's ready for war.

Iran warning that if it's attacked, it'll respond decisively and that all bases, facilities and assets of what it calls hostile forces, in other words, the United States, will be legitimate targets. The president has given the regime less than two weeks to come back with proposals on curbing its nuclear program, ballistic missiles, and support for proxy militant groups.

So far, there’s no indication that Iran is going to agree certainly to all of that. And if it doesn't, then the ball is in Trump's court. He certainly has the firepower to launch an attack, but to what end? What's been missing in all this buildup is a clear explanation of what the president wants to achieve.

Martha.

RADDATZ: That is indeed the big question. Thanks to Ian Pannell.

The roundtable is up next. We’re back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RADDATZ: And the roundtable joins me now.

Former DNC chair Donna Brazile, ABC News correspondent Jay O'Brien, who covers Capitol Hill, "USA Today" Washington bureau chief Susan Page, and “National Review” editor Ramesh Ponnuru.

Great to see all of you.

Susan, I want to start with you.

Let's talk about the State of the Union. I'm sure the president will come out and say the state of the union is terrific. But he also faces this Supreme Court loss.

SUSAN PAGE, USA TODAY WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Yes, it’s a tough time for the president. And, you know, the most nervous people in that hall are not going to be the Supreme Court justices. They know that President Trump is going to have harsh words for them.

RADDATZ: And they never applaud or do anything.

PAGE: And they -- they’re impassive. It's congressional Republicans. Because Trump isn't on the ballot in November but the midterm elections are going to be all about Trump. He's doubling down on tariffs, which Americans say hurt the economy, and he continues to argue that the economy is going great, when that is not how it feels to most Americans.

RADDATZ: Jay, you’re on Capitol Hill every day. How do Republicans feel about this decision?

JAY O'BRIEN, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: There are some who are breathing this temporary sigh of relief because they don't have to be saddled with an unpopular policy on tariffs, despite the president doubling down. But also, there is this unease because we’ve seen the president muse about bringing a vote to Congress to codify these tariffs. It's unclear if leadership’s going to get behind that. Speaker Johnson has talked about “the best path forward,” but we don't know exactly what path that is.

RADDATZ: Is it doubtful he’d go to The Hill? I --

O’BRIEN: It’s unclear because he’s been trying to --

RADDATZ: It doesn’t seem like it.

O’BRIEN: Johnson doesn't want him to.

RADDATZ: Yes.

O’BRIEN: Johnson’s been trying to block his members from taking a tough tariff vote. But if he’s left with no other option, he might have to, and that puts them in a tough spot.

RADDATZ: Donna, our polls show that the tariffs were very unpopular. So, is there any sense that this could actually help the Republicans? I mean, given what Jamieson Greer said, oh, everything’s going to be about the same, but not really?

DONNA BRAZILE, FORMER DNC CHAIR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: I mean, look, the worst job creation since 2003, only 181,000 jobs last year. He promised that this -- the tariffs would lower prices. And, in fact, Americans paid more than $2,000 more for groceries, for furniture and for other products. It has decimated -- I mean the manufacturing sector has not revived.

So, I don't think the president is going to take a victory lap, although he's going to pretend that everything is golden like he believes.

But the truth is the American people are in a state of anxiety over the country, over their financial future, and they are worried sick about what's going on in Washington.

RADDATZ: Ramesh, were you surprised at the vitriol coming out of the president about the justices, two of whom he appointed?

RAMEESH PONNURU, NATIONAL REVIEW EDITOR AND ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, in another presidency, you might have heard somebody say, "We're disappointed in this decision. We disagree with it, but we're going to roll forward."

I don't anybody expected that kind of sober, even-keeled response from this president. I think we're at this point kind of inured to the kind of demagogic attacks he makes, but it really is beyond the pale that he questioned their loyalty to the country for reaching a different legal conclusion.

RADDATZ: Even though it's loyalty to the Constitution they're trying to do.

Susan, I --let -- let's turn to Iran, that you heard Ian there in -- in the last block talk about the potential. I've been reporting on that as well for the past few weeks. Do you think it will happen? Do you think this is something the president would do?

SUSAN PAGE, USA TODAY WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: I think it is something he could do. And the question now is, is there unstoppable momentum for an attack? He set a deadline. He said bad things will happen if there's not a deal.

RADDATZ: You got that massive building.

PAGE: That's right. We've sent two aircraft carrier groups to the region.

But what he hasn't done is give a single speech to the American people explaining why this would be crucial for the United States to do. Nor has he explained clearly what exactly is the goal? Is it regime change or the nuclear program or protecting protesters or something else? That is not yet clear.

RADDATZ: Previous use of the military didn't get us in a huge war. You had the 12-day war against Iran last year, hitting the nuclear facilities. This could be different.

O’BRIEN: Yeah.

RADDATZ: This could be longer.

How would Republicans feel like that -- feel about this if this is possibly sustained or if there are attacks, if there's retaliation and people are injured? There's a lot of things that can go wrong.

O’BRIEN: And I think it goes back to the point on that “why”. And it's something that you've brought up in your reporting a lot. The president has to make it clear what the “why” is because he said Iran's nuclear program was obliterated.

RADDATZ: Yeah (ph).

O’BRIEN: And he briefed members of Congress on that.

And so, every time these Republicans go out to a camera, that is the talking point that they repeat. And now, they're going to be confronted with questions of, why are we in Iran if the president has said the alternate?

He has an opportunity on Tuesday night to start to give the American people his thinking, but so far, he hasn't done that.

RADDATZ: And it may well be that we've hit Iran by then. Who knows?

O’BRIEN: Yeah.

RADDATZ: And he could -- he could talk about that.

BRAZILE: He hasn't briefed members of Congress, Martha. He hasn't -- not only --

RADDATZ: Or the American people.

BRAZILE: Or the American people.

And Susan is right. He keeps changing the goalposts. We don't know what he's trying to do.

PONNURU: And we're not sure that he does.

(LAUGHTER)

RADDATZ: Ramesh, look, he's had -- he had, according to them, very successful in Venezuela, a huge operation that appeared to go exactly the way they wanted to and flawlessly.

But this is a president who campaigned on keeping America out of wars and he has used the military in these kind of one-day -- as we said, these kind of one-day strikes or a couple of day strikes, but this really could be very different.

PONNURU: I think we've established that Republican voters, including MAGA voters, they're not in principle against using the military overseas, but they do want a defined and compelling and achievable objective. We don't know what that is, as we all have been saying, and he hasn't explained what it is.

RADDATZ: Well, in some ways, I mean, he says he wants a nuclear deal, right? So, he could pressure them to come to the table under his terms.

PONNURU: I’m not -- I'm not sure that that is going to be something that a lot of Republican voters find compelling enough to get another paper promise from this regime, particularly when we already had a deal with them over the nuclear program that Trump tore up.

RADDATZ: It would have to be quite an extraordinary deal to come out of this on the good side, I suppose.

Jay, let's go back to the Hill.

O’BRIEN: Yeah.

RADDATZ: We've got the Department of Homeland Security shutdown, which for a while there were -- there was no real fallout. We didn't feel it.

But overnight, the president announced that we will now not have TS -- maybe the president didn't announce that -- but not have TSA pre-check and no Global Entry. And for people who don't know what that is, that is very convenient for people who have it.

So, what is this?

O’BRIEN: Yeah.

RADDATZ: I mean, do they really have to get rid of this at this point or the Republicans playing hardball, the administration?

O’BRIEN: It’s suspended right now. And the question has been, do they have to suspend it? Because you could make lines bigger and more work for TSA agents if you suspend those.

But right now, DHS says those two are suspended. Also, personal escorts for members of Congress through the airport. That is suspended. So, it ratches up the personal pressure on a lot of these members.

And you hit the nail on the head. The longer a shutdown goes on, the worse the impacts always are. This was always considered to be one of those shutdowns that would not hit the American people personally for a while. But we're seeing this impact that was really not anticipated, not something that DHS had prep the American public was going to come, and it's going to hit people hard and it's going to make them rethink the shutdown.

RADDATZ: So, the Democrats rethink the shutdown?

O'BRIEN: Possibly, possibly. But they also are backing an issue that we've seen in the polling, a lot of American support.

RADDATZ: Susan, let's talk about the other issues the president is sure to address on Tuesday, and that's immigration. Here's what our poll says. 58 percent disapprove of Trump's handling of immigration, 62 percent oppose ICE tactics, 77 percent say federal agencies need judicial approval for forcibly entering someone's home.

Although, the best issue in our poll was him at the border, about 50 percent in what he's done with the Mexican border. So we've got to give him credit for that there. Half the people like it. So, how does he address this?

PAGE: Here's an issue that was an asset to him in the election in 2024, has now become a liability. I think the repercussions of the protest in Minneapolis and the killing of two American citizens who were protesting was a real turning point. He's now 18 -- in your poll, 18 points underwater in approval on immigration.

And you were talking about the shutdown. The underlying issues behind the shutdown are Democratic demands of new limits on ICE agents who are enforcing deportation orders and other immigration laws. And that is a debate Democrats will be happy to keep having.

RADDATZ: I suspect, on Tuesday night, if he talks about immigration, which I bet he does, he talks mostly about the Mexican, the border with Mexico.

PONNNURU: That's right. And that is an accomplishment. The problem for him is that because it's an accomplishment, the salience of the issue has gone down. The administration, having sealed the southern border, had a choice to make about what strategy he was going to pursue.

Tom Homan wanted to do something that prioritized violent criminals. He lost that internal debate in favor of a more maximum confrontation strategy. That's what he's paying for now.

RADDATZ: Donna, if you're listening to all this news about Republicans in our poll, wasn't that great for Democrats either? They didn't really think the Democrats were handling any of this any better.

Democrats have picked Governor Abigail Spanberger from Virginia to deliver the response to Trump. What's the party trying to signal with having her?

BRAZILE: Well, she's a great choice because once again, as governor, just for almost two months, I mean, she's focusing on affordability. Democrats need to earn the trust of the American people.

They earn the trust by saying, we're here, we're listening to you. It's not about giving one speech or having multiple rallies. It's about making sure that the American people know that we are going to address their issues, their concerns, not just about affordability, securing the borders, keeping our communities safe. And I think she's able to articulate that message on behalf of the Democrats.

RADDATZ: Donna, I want to close. And we just have about a minute here, with the death of Reverend Jesse Jackson at age 84. It -- can't exaggerate his power and his influence of the civil rights movement. You were close to him. You worked on his first presidential campaign.

BRAZILE: You know, when I think about my own growth and many of us who came through that struggle, Reverend Jackson was that bridge from Dr. King's generation to my own and into the future. He was Dr. King's lieutenant who understood the civil rights wasn't just for black people, but it was for all Americans. He will be remembered for not only the voter registration campaigns, Keep Hope Alive, Our Time Has Come, but helping us in a new era.

I see the bridge from Martin Luther King to Jesse Jackson to, of course, the election of Barack Obama. He made America, you know, feel hope again. I'm going to miss my brother. I'm going to miss those late-night calls, those early-morning calls. But he was a man of deep faith and optimism, and I hope the American people will pay tribute to a great American.

RADDATZ: And lots of images from those -- from those years of Jesse Jackson, especially when Barack Obama was elected president. Quite a history. Thank you so much to all of you. I know you'll all be watching the State of the Union very careful Tuesday night. We all will be. Thanks again.

Up next, we'll bring you a remarkable story of one boy's resilience and recovery from the war in Ukraine as we approach four years since the conflict began.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RADDATZ: This Tuesday marks four years since Russian tanks crossed the Ukrainian border and shattered peace in the country, with little hope of an end to the war in sight. Overnight, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announcing that in just the past week alone Russia launched more than 1300 drones and more than 1400 bombs against Ukraine, including dozens of ballistic missiles.

Over the course of this war, some 15,000 Ukrainian civilians have been killed, according to the U.N. More than 3,000 of them children. Yet those who have survived this war, the countless who have been wounded both physically and emotionally, are a story of resilience.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RADDATZ (voice-over): Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine four years ago, the toll on its population and its children has been devastating. 11-year-old Roman Oleksiv bears the deep scars of Russia's aggression. Roman was only eight when a missile attack hit the clinic where he and his mother were for a routine visit, just five months into the war.

ROMAN OLEKSIV, SURVIVOR OF RUSSIA'S MISSILE STRIKE (through translator): We sat down on the couch, and we're waiting for our appointment. I was thrown back and mom was still lying next to the couch and said, lie down. Then the second explosion happened.

RADDATZ: This is when Roman says everything went dark. When his eyes opened, he saw his mother lying in the rubble. She did not make it out alive that day.

R. OLEKSIV (through translator): I went up to her, I said good-bye to her, and started making my way out further. A man picked me up and carried me to the ambulances.

RADDATZ: Roman's father, Yaroslav, an accordion player like Roman and his mother, was working at a music academy hundreds of miles away when he saw the images of the clinic on the news. When he finally made it to Roman --

YAROSLAV OLEKSIV, ROMAN'S FATHER (through translator): You couldn't recognize him.

RADDATZ: Doctors said Roman's best chance at survival would be abroad. They were lucky to find care in Germany, where Roman spent a month in a coma and then began a three-year rehabilitation journey. 36 surgeries later, his recovery, remarkable. Regaining movement in his fingers and beginning to play the accordion again. Told he may never walk, Roman went a step further, returning to an old passion, ballroom dancing, even competitively.

R. OLEKSIV: It's like my hobby and that's all. And second is my therapy. When I'm dancing, it's therapy for my leg, but when I'm playing accordion, it's therapy for my two hands and arms.

RADDATZ (voice-over): He's undeterred by the burns of that day, showing the world how the children of this war have persisted. Roman's story resonating across the globe, even bringing this translator to tears at the European Parliament.

OLEKSIV: (Foreign Language).

RADDATZ (voice-over): The story is now part of a documentary from Director Evgeny Afineevsky, whose film "Children in the Fire" shows the war through the eyes of eight Ukrainian kids, many of them on Capitol Hill this month.

EVGENY AFINEEVSKY, DIRECTOR, "CHILDREN IN THE FIRE": I wanted specifically to give voice to the younger generation of Ukrainians about their dreams, about their future, about their resilience, about their hope, and about their unbrokenness.

RADDATZ (voice-over): Unbroken despite the suffering. Afineevsky had psychologists with the children as he spoke to them and used animation to tell their stories of trauma, and real-life images to show triumphs.

AFINEEVSKY: For me, each of these children already won this war, despite the war is happening. For me, these children are amazing resemblance of role models of the younger generation of Ukrainians that we want to see in the future Ukraine.

RADDATZ (voice-over): For Roman, sharing his story gives him strength, hope and a mission.

OLEKSIV (through translator): When I look at the scars, I always remember my mom and these things that happened. I do miss my mom a lot. But yes, I also do feel courage after all of this that I've lived through.

RADDATZ (voice-over): And this son of musicians finds rhythm in a famous Ukrainian poem.

OLEKSIV (through translator): The poem, it's about the fact that humans have wings, and they're not physical wings, but moral wings, the fact that we can help others.

RADDATZ (voice-over): And Roman is doing everything he can to help bring attention to this ongoing war and the children who have shared his pain.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RADDATZ (on camera): A remarkable boy. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RADDATZ: Be sure to tune in Tuesday night right here on ABC with David Muir. That's all for us today. Thanks for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Check out "World News Tonight," and have a great day.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)