Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone, on the day the New Hampshire Primary, they have that ceremonial first vote just after midnight, in the tiny town of Dixville Notch, you know about that? Those votes have been counted. It was Nikki Haley, s6ix. Donald Trump, nothing. Kind of a small sample size, right? Six votes, but so far, it's a shout out.

This January 23rd, is also a day when bipartisan Senate negotiators might finalize the deal on border security in exchange for aid to Ukraine. It's the day after the US bombed eight more Houthi targets in the Middle East, and it's the day when the Supreme Court might rule on whether Donald Trump and any President, has total immunity from prosecution, even if he orders the US military to assassinate a political rival. What? Yes, really.

If you haven't heard this yet, here was the moment-- We're going to play a clip, in the US Court of Appeals hearing, when a Trump attorney argued that the President could order SEAL Team Six of the United States Navy to assassinate a political rival, and be immune from prosecution for it. This begins with a question to the Trump attorney by Appeals Court judge, Florence Pan.

Florence Pan: I asked you a "yes" or "no" question. Could a president who ordered SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, he'd be subject to criminal prosecution?

1. John Sauer: If he were impeached and convicted first.

Florence Pan: Your answer is no?

Brian Lehrer: Judge Florence Pan and Trump Attorney D. John Sauer. The Supreme Court is expected to take one side or another of that exchange, any day now, perhaps today. With me now is a veteran of the US Navy, now a Democratic member of Congress from New Jersey, Congresswoman Member Mikie Sherrill, who represents New Jersey's 11th Congressional District, which includes parts of Morris, Essex, and Passaic counties, including the North Jersey areas of Maplewood, Montclair, Morristown, Madison, and some places that don't begin with M.

Congresswoman Sherrill spent nearly 10 years on active duty in the Navy, flying missions throughout Europe, and the Middle East. She also attended Georgetown Law School, served as a Russia policy officer, and in the US Attorney's Office in New Jersey. In Congress, she's on the House Armed Services Committee, and the Select Committee on Strategic Competition with the Chinese Communist Party as that committee is called, and she's considered a possible contender for Governor, when Governor Murphy is term-limited after next year.

The congresswoman has recently been speaking against House Republican's latest effort to restrict abortion at the federal level. Certainly, about the border in the Middle East and Ukraine, and also that the Child Tax Credit and SALT tax deduction issue. She introduced a bill to protect students from deepfake videos after Westfield High School in New Jersey-- Did you hear about this? Reported cases of fake porn videos generated by AI, made to look like actual girls who attend the school.

We have plenty to talk about. Congresswoman Sherrill, always good of you to come on the show and answer questions from me, and constituents, and other callers. Welcome back to WNYC.

Congresswoman Sherrill: Well, thanks so much for having me back. I really appreciate it.

Brian Lehrer: Can we start with the deepfake videos? What happened there at Westfield High School, and what role do you see in Congress for response?

Congresswoman Sherrill: Yes, Brian, as you know, I'm a mom of four school-aged kids, and this one is really heartbreaking. Images of young girls, using AI were made to look as if they were naked pictures of these girls, 14-year-old girls. As their parents went to address this, there was really nothing, no regulations on the books to address this AI-generated image, which you may have heard called deepfakes.

The parents came to me to discuss what might be done. I worked with Joe Morelle in the House, a member from New York who's working on this issue, and we put forward a piece of legislation that would have penalties for this type of action. I really deeply believe, as I've dealt with social media, and my school-aged kids, and have heard stories from other people that, while a lot of the new technologies we're moving into with AI and the future quantum, and other ways that are going to change many people's lives, and often for the better.

There's some really exciting stuff out there that is going to make a huge impact on people, but we've got to address the downside risks to our children. I think we are seeing them rapidly accumulate into how so many of our kids are just not being protected in the way that we really need to do. I think this is just the tip of the spear as to how we need to address some of what's going on online, as most especially with respect to our children.

Brian Lehrer: As creepy and sexist and predatory as those videos sound, would high school students sharing AI-generated porn videos get arrested, and criminally charged?

Congresswoman Sherrill: There are some criminal penalties, but the majority of them would be civil penalties. I think too, a lot of this, we have to take into account how you're going to address this, what the fault is of the parents, but again, we have to give the parents [chuckles] more tools. I have to tell you, as a mom, I never felt like I was completely in control of what was going on social media with my children.

We worked hard, but you always have this suspicion that your kids are smarter than you with social media, and can get around a lot of the protections you attempt to put in place. I'll tell you, for so many of us, COVID, really just let the horse out of the barn on all this. You have a child whose life is online at this point. For many of us, their school day was online, they had to turn in homework online, their social life was online, as they were quarantined, and couldn't be in person.

Suddenly, you just had this exponential increase in your children's presence and engagement online, and we didn't have an exponential increase in all the tools parents could have to protect those kids. We're looking at a lot of those now. Even in the Committee for the Strategic Competition with China vis-à-vis TikTok, and what's going on there, but there are-- We could certainly do a lot better.

I'm sympathetic to many of the groups that say, "Well, we're concerned about this," because say, for example, you have an LGBTQ child whose parents do not accept them, and the only kind of support network they have is online, I think we need to work to ensure people have that access, but I think what's far more likely to occur in these instances, is a child who's slightly different from his or her peers, is going to face a lot of bullying online.

A lot of things that go on that we're not protecting them from, up to and including, as we've heard testimony on in the Senate, training and teaching them how to die by suicide, and how to purchase all the accoutrements to do that. That's horrific to me that a child could be seeing all this online, and the stories of what some of the children who've died by suicide, were viewing online right before they die, are heartbreaking and horrific. We have got to do better by our kids.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, I see some people are calling in already, so I want to make sure everybody's got the phone number to ask Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill a question on any of the above. From the issues that I listed in the intro, we're going to hope to get to all of them, or most of them, or anything else relevant. 212-433-WNYC.

First priority will go to people from the district, but you don't have to be from the district. If you're not from the district, and we get too many calls not from the district, we're going to bump some people. It's not because of what you want to ask. 212-433-9692. Call or text. [crosstalk] You can also text.

Congresswoman Sherrill: You don't have to live in M-town, Brian. You can call from any of the towns in my district, Parsippany, Livingston, whichever one you want.

Brian Lehrer: The P-towns, the L-towns, Dover. Even from Dover, right?

Congresswoman Sherrill: Right. Exactly.

Brian Lehrer: Meanwhile, here's another AI fake issue in the news right now, maybe you know about it. Very different from a high school issue. Someone made an AI-generated fake of Joe Biden's voice that they sent to people's phones in New Hampshire as a robocall. Here's a little piece of it. The fake Joe Biden, as you'll hear urges the recipient not to vote in today's New Hampshire primary.

The fake Joe Biden: What a bunch of malarkey? We know the value of voting democratic on our votes count. It's important that you save your votes for the November election. We'll need your help in electing Democrats up and down the ticket. Voting this Tuesday only enables the Republicans in their quest to elect Donald Trump again. Your vote makes a difference in November, not just Tuesday. If you would like to be removed from future calls, please press 2 now.

Brian Lehrer: Again, just to be clear, that was not the real Joe Biden. AI can do his voice better than anyone on Saturday Night Live. That was a facsimile of his voice generated by artificial intelligence that someone was using, I guess, as a voter suppression dirty trick, is the right label for it. Congresswoman, is that against federal law in any way already as far as you know?

Congresswoman Sherrill: Brian, I'd seen some reporting on this. I'd have to look at the details of it, as far as what they said, and whether or not it would be construed as illegal. I think these kind of dirty tricks, as you're saying, have been going on as long as we've had elections. I remember when I was a lawyer in New York City, and I was working with Protect the Election, and we had calls coming in then that certain mail was going out to communities, I believe in the Bronx, with the wrong election date, and these mailers were all in Spanish.

The English-language mailers had the correct election date, and the Spanish-language mailers had the incorrect election date. People have been attempting for, like I said, probably, as long as we've had elections, to misdirect voters that they want to keep away from voting, that they think aren't going to vote for their candidate. Again, this is a new type of technology that we have got to learn to deal with, and it's tough.

There aren't laws on the books to say, if this voice sounds too much like the voice of the president, if it's generated to do just that from AI, you can't do it this way. That's just a new technology that the law has not really responded to yet, but I think we do very much have to begin to address all these things. It's difficult. I know that every time you look into some of these issues, you're always worried about unintended consequences.

As I was laying out why I think it's important that we address our children on social media, the unintended consequence might be that LGBTQ children don't have a community that they need for moral support and mental health help, so how do we address that? You have to-- It is very difficult, but we can't just say, "It's too hard, so we can't do it." That's not who we are as a people. It's not how our government is meant to function.

Something like this, I think, just points again to the new types of challenges we have. Especially, in a world where too many people, I think have been misled by false information and lies, as we saw in some of the January 6 hearings that, for example, the Former President Trump was putting out, despite many people in his administration telling him that was not true, so we've really got to address all the ways in which we can make sure people know that their vote counts, that the election is fair, and that our democracy is strong and resilient.

Brian Lehrer: We have a couple of listener reactions to the Westfield High School deepfake porn video story. One comes from a text message from a listener, who notes that Westfield is not in your district, but in Congressman Tom Kean Jr.'s district. The question from the listener is, does he support the controls on AI?

Congresswoman Sherrill: Yes, he has co-sponsored the legislation I just spoke about on having the penalties for this type--

Brian Lehrer: You've got bipartisan buy-in on that from-

Congresswoman Sherrill: Yes.

Brian Lehrer: -the New Jersey delegation. Lisa in Brooklyn has a different question about it. Lisa, you're on WNYC with Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill. Hi.

Lisa: Hi. The general category for me this falls under is, something is blowing up right now, we need to address it right now, we're going to make legislation right now, and we're going to focus on that teeny tiny thing, which is very common in politics, and rarely leads to comprehensive solutions, and as you say, frequently leads to unintended consequences. The thing, or the couple of things that make this a hot topic, but are irrelevant to the actual problem are, A, pornography, and, B, protect our children. The issue is about neither of those.

The issue is about taking someone's body, voice, face, identity, and forging it without consent, without permission for any purpose, even purposes that people think are good. If someone did a deepfake of you, and used it to raise funds for your campaign, you may get lots of dollars and lots of voters, and still feel deeply troubled and violated by what has been done to you by this, same technology, same general approach.

Get a working group, don't jump to an immediate legislative solution, and talk about issues of forgery, identity fraud, libel, and slander. AI is only the most recent technological event, but I reference you to, I believe it was IBM, using an image of the little tramp, which was Charlie Chaplin, and wound up with intellectual property suits.

Brian Lehrer: Lisa, let me just for time, let me jump in and ask, are you just trying to make sure that Congress goes broad enough on this issue, or are you trying-- It sounds like maybe you're also trying to protect something from being singled out?

Lisa: I'm sorry, there was a blip, something from what?

Brian Lehrer: Being singled out?

Lisa: Well, if you just make a law of pornography, it will not have anything to do with libel, or slander, or identity theft.

Brian Lehrer: Ah, there.

Lisa: If you're just making it preventing kids, as I said, this is just one small example. I was just going to say, a current hot topic in the entertainment industry is that, people are now sampling voices of professional voice actors who are being put out of business, because their voices are being stolen.

Brian Lehrer: Lisa, forgive me, I'm going to jump in again and leave it there. I hear all of that. Kids make porn, victimizing some of their peers even without AI. I think that's one thing that Lisa is pointing up. I guess, just wanting to make sure that you're addressing the root problem, not a symptom.

Congresswoman Sherrill: Sure. I think Lisa raises some good points, which I know we've been looking at. As at the advent of deepfakes on the Science, Space and Technology Committee when I was a member there on a broader solution to this, I know as I said, we are looking at some broader issues related to, for example, TikTok, because that is a Chinese government-owned entity that we're very concerned about some of the national security implications of, as well as some of the propaganda implications of, which is a broader systemic issue, as we look into that.

This isn't where it begins and ends. I do think though that there is room sometimes as you are entering into trying to legislate in new areas to begin with a small piece of the problem that is easier to understand the ins and outs of, and legislate in that area, come up with a smaller piece of legislation to immediately address a smaller problem that is less fraught, and has more of a distinct outline of what the pros and cons will be, and how you address those, and what the penalties would be, and what it looks like.

I think there's that famous, the Supreme Court quote, I believe, with porn that you'll know it when you see it. We can't have those [chuckles] amorphous definitions in the law. We need to be able to say, "This is what the problem is, this is how it needs to be addressed, and these are the penalties." Sometimes it's not just a matter of myopically focusing on one little piece of it, and ignoring the rest.

Sometimes it is starting to take a bite out of the bigger hole, so that we can effectively legislate in an area and continue that, and understand how to better do it. I do think one area, I would just say, is just to give people a sense of why children-- I think why that's an area to definitely look at, as we see the mental health implications of that so clearly. We know, for example, that China who has ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, and pushes out information to children in China on their version of TikTok that is all positive messaging.

They limit the time that children can be on their screens, and really are worried about those mental health aspects. That same company is then pushing into our children some stuff that can be very damaging. Those are just some areas where I do think we need to focus on children in this area, certainly.

Brian Lehrer: By the way, you've mentioned twice now that TikTok has a relationship to the Chinese government, and you're on that committee in the house on competition with China, and you mentioned your own kids. Do you restrict your kids from using TikTok, which is obviously so huge in the United States now, because of its relationship to China, or do you not?

Congresswoman Sherrill: Yes. My children, and I, again, have trepidation saying this very confidently, because I am constantly monitoring [chuckles] and checking and hoping that they can tell-- My children are not supposed to, and as far as I know, do not have TikTok on their phones. Now, they are often sent TikTok videos that they watch from other people. It is somewhat pernicious, and I think the concern is that, the Chinese Communist Party has the ability to affect what our children are seeing, what large portions of our population, I mean, to Lisa's point, it's a broader issue than just our children here, but large portions of our population are seeing they have the ability.

I don't think that we certainly don't have their algorithms, and they have the ability to affect what large portions of our population see routinely, daily, hourly, et cetera. I think that is something that we should be very concerned about a foreign government having. I personally think that there needs to be a forced sale, and that the company here in the US needs to be under US ownership.

Brian Lehrer: Ah, interesting. We'll continue in a minute. Much more to get to with Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill from New Jersey. More of your calls and texts. Stay with us.

[MUSIC - Marden Hill: Hijack]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC as we continue with Democratic Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill from the 11th District in Northern New Jersey. I want to get your reaction to the clip that I played at the beginning of the segment of the Appeals Court Judge getting the Trump attorney to admit that the sweeping immunity Trump is seeking to make most of his criminal charges go away, would empower him to order the Navy's SEAL Team Six to carry out political assassinations, while he's in office, and that impeachment, not criminal law, would be the only way that any President could start to be held accountable. I thought you might have a reaction to that as a Navy veteran, do you?

Congresswoman Sherrill: I have a reaction to that as an American citizen, [chuckles] Brian. Quite frankly, that to me is a deep misunderstanding of our Constitution and our system of government. I think as General Millie, the Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in his retirement, "Soldiers and sailors don't take an oath to a king or a queen. They take an oath to the Constitution."

Every single person, including the President, who also takes an oath to that Constitution, has a responsibility and is not above the law. No one in this country is above the law. Nobody is a dictator that can determine who the law applies to. It applies to all of us, including and up to the President of the United States. I think that represents a deep disrespect for our government, and for the government we've all chosen to live under in our democracy.

I also think it is a delay tactic. I think that was a three-judge panel, and so now they're appealing it. I think, again, with his complete disregard for our institutions of government, I think Former President Trump is attempting to delay until, hopefully, I'm sure in his night, he can become the President and order the investigation stopped from his Department of Justice.

Brian Lehrer: All right. We'll see what the Supreme Court says. The ruling expected any day. Also, as a Navy veteran and a member of the Arm Services Committee, I want to get your reaction to something pertinent to the war in the Middle East right now. The headlines this morning, include eight more attacks by the US against the Houthis from Yemen. The US is actively at war now in the Middle East. I think it's fair to say, not just Israel and its enemies. The Constitution gives authority to declare war to Congress. Is Biden overstepping without coming to you first?

Congresswoman Sherrill: The Biden administration is using the 2001 AUMF to prosecute these attacks against people who are attacking Americans. I think there have so far been 83 wounded Americans recently. A contractor was killed. We know they're harassing shipping in the Red Sea, not just of the United States, but of the Canadians, the British, the Israelis, so really trying to upend the freedom of navigation in that area, and making it dangerous for our shipping. I think--

Brian Lehrer: When you say the 2001, that's the sweeping authorization after 9/11, and that applies here, and that's okay with you, or not?

Congresswoman Sherrill: You know what? I think we need to update the 2001 AUMF, quite frankly, repeal it, and update it. Congress has not done that, and I think that's the problem. I also think it's problematic, and I think the reason we've not done that is, right now we're unable to even seem to pass a budget, or border security to date. I think it's troubling to try to think of us, and how the extremists in the GOP would weigh in on passing a new AUMF, although that is exactly what I think we need to do.

Brian Lehrer: If the US continues to participate in this escalation, at what point would you support asserting Congress's other war powers on behalf of the American people, rather than let the executive branch make war without a formal debate by the people's elected Congress?

Congresswoman Sherrill: Quite frankly, I would be willing to do that now. If we could generate the Congressional will to repeal the 2001 AUMF and put forward a new AUMF for what is going on right now, I think that is the best way forward. I, again, it has been an incredible struggle in this Congress to get some of the basic governing done that we need to get done. I would be very interested in the speaker's understanding of whether or not he can get the votes to both repeal the 2001 AUMF, while at the same time issuing a new AUMF, more particularly tailored to what is going on right now.

Brian Lehrer: Okay. Next topic, the border. I understand Senate negotiators, a Democrat, a Republican, and Kyrsten Sinema, an independent, are very close to a deal on a new border bill in exchange for aid for Ukraine. We have a call on the border. David, in Englewood, you're on WNYC with Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill. Hi, David.

David: Hi. First of all, Brian, I just want to remind you, I hope that one day you will still bring on Thomas Sowell for a whole hour. I don't know if you've ever had a Black conservative as a guest?

Brian Lehrer: We have definitely [crosstalk] had Black conservatives as a guest, including just recently, a Wall Street Journal columnist who fits that description, but go ahead, Jason Riley.

David: My question for the Congress lady is dealing with the border. Why is it that we keep hearing-- We have a broken immigration system? Why are we not just enforcing the laws that we have right today? When the antitrust case is brought together, you may not agree with the Sherman Act or the Clayton Act, and these old laws, but those laws are enforced every day.

We have over 12,000 people just walking into the country, and nobody seems to give a damn. I would like just the law to be enforced as it is today. You have millions of people around the world waiting for years to come here legally, and people can just walk into the country, and then you're talking about giving them work permits, and then driver's licenses. Then, you'll say, later on, "Oh, we can't uproot these people. They're rooted into the community." It's absurd.

Brian Lehrer: David, I'm going to get a response for you from the Congresswoman. What do you say to his points, and what do you support? What do you hope? What do you think? Maybe even, what do you know is coming out of the Senate?

Congresswoman Sherrill: Sure. I would suggest that the majority of members of Congress, both Democratic and Republican, to give a damn. In fact, I think you saw that recent letter by the Democratic governors, a wide-ranging group of Democratic governors, including my own governor, Governor Hochul, Healey, I know the Arizona governor. Governors across the nation, Democratic governors across the nation urging a border deal, but part of the problem as enforcement is having the resources to do that. That's why, as the President put forward the supplemental for Ukraine funding, it included resources for the border, for enforcement, and for better processing at the border to get people through that quickly, which is desperately needed.

Now we have in the Democratic-led Senate, a bipartisan deal being worked on, and really, the senators working on this deal they haven't taken "no" for an answer. They have continued to push forward, knowing that this is important to the country. You've heard Mitch McConnell say, "This is the best deal, Republicans." In a Democratic Senate, he thinks this is the best deal Republicans will get.

Yet, every time you start to hear about how the border deal in the Senate, the bipartisan deal is coming together, you see extremists on the far right, from the Freedom Caucus and others, in the House trying to amend the deal. The latest is, as we come closer and closer to getting resources to the border, to address this problem, which has a bipartisan concern and support for addressing this, you see Former President Trump weighing in and say, "No, don't address it. Wait till I get in."

Brian Lehrer: Let me ask you. We only have three minutes left in the segment, I know you got to go. You wrote a letter to Speaker Johnson on Friday, expressing your dismay that he would refuse to even consider a bipartisan compromise being negotiated in the Senate, but here's the speaker after meeting at the White House, in a bipartisan meeting the other day. Tell me if you still think he's saying no to anything.

Speaker Johnson: We must insist that the border be the top priority. I think we have some consensus around that table. Everyone understands the urgency of that, and we're going to continue to press for it.

Brian Lehrer: He's talking about consensus. Do you think Speaker Johnson is standing in the way?

Congresswoman Sherrill: I think it will be telling what we do once the Senate passes their bipartisan negotiated border deal. Will he put that on the floor in the house? Can he ensure they have the votes? Certainly, Speaker Johnson wants to focus, and make the border a high priority, because that is what far-right members want him to do, because it's good for their campaigns.

It's good for their partisan politics, but what we really need is a solution, not just focusing on the problem, or admiring the problem. I'm hoping he puts the Senate, once the Senate Bill is passed to the Senate, we can get that on the House, and get a vote there, and that will be very telling as to whether he's serious about handling this problem.

Brian Lehrer: Last issue, and our last-minute, abortion. I see you issued a statement on what you see as a House Republican effort to limit abortion rights at the national level. What's happening?

Congresswoman Sherrill: As you know, the Supreme Court said this was a state's rights issue. I disagreed with that. I think it's a woman's rights issue, reproductive health rights issue, but the Republicans in the last election, many of them in swing districts like mine said, they weren't going to weigh in because it was a state's rights issue, which left millions of women without access to abortion rights, and reproductive health care.

Now, as we anticipated, they are trying to pass a nationwide abortion ban in many different ways. The latest was two votes that we took, that would move money into what are called pregnancy crisis centers. Centers that only give women information on support they can get to carry the baby, determine to have the baby, try to force them to do that. I think, as somebody who's had two children in law school, I would have loved support for my pregnancy, but we need legitimate healthcare centers, we need women to have access to legitimate healthcare, and all of the knowledge that they need to make a good decision with their doctors.

Strikingly, some of the money for this would have been moved away from TANF funding. The very funding that, if a woman chose to have a baby, and she didn't have a lot of resources, might use that money to help get food for herself and her child. They're moving that money out of actually supporting women and poor children, and into these pregnancy crisis centers. It's really strikingly bad policy, I think for women, and just once again, how Republicans are pushing for nationwide anti-choice legislation.

Brian Lehrer: Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill, Democrat from the 11th District in Northern New Jersey. Thanks for coming on today. We always appreciate it.

Congresswoman Sherrill: Thanks, Brian. I really appreciate it. Have a good one.

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. One correction to something that I inaccurately said during that segment. It's not the Supreme Court that will rule on immunity, they decided to defer for the moment, though it's going to wind up back there, eventually, almost no doubt, it is the Court of Appeals, the same court that we played the clip from, where a judge had an interaction with a Trump attorney who claimed that a President unless he was impeached, would have complete immunity from prosecution for any criminal act, even having a political rival assassinated.

It's the Court of Appeals, not the Supreme Court that's expected to rule on that question any day now, and then no doubt it's going to go to the Supreme Court, but correcting what I said before. Brian Lehrer on WNYC. We turned the page from national politics, much more in a minute.

 

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.