Naomi Wolf

I've read both the Minnesota and Illinois lawsuits.

They're really political diatribes masquerading as lawsuits.

If you look at what both states are asking the courts to do,

It's to kick ICE out of those states and cities and to bar ICE from carrying on federal law enforcement in Illinois and Minnesota.

That's the top thing both states asked to do, and they cite zero precedent for that.

There is zero precedent for that.

There is no way a judge can say, you federal law enforcement agency, you are not allowed to execute federal law

in a certain state or city.

So these lawsuits, which appear to be coordinated,

They're potentially powerful political statements, but I don't give them much of a chance of achieving the legal thing that they're asking for in the courts.

Well, thanks for having me, Laura.

To your first question, I think in the 47-year failed history of the Islamic Republic, I think the people of Iran have never been closer to obtaining the liberty they enjoyed before 1979.

Second, in terms of what may or may not need to be done about it, I think your points about the concern about how the United States has proceeded with regime change are completely valid.

But I don't think there's any circumstance in which President Trump is going to insert the United States into the equation.

I think rather what he will do and has done is to set conditions so that the people of Iran could establish and reestablish control for themselves and take control of their own future and destiny.

And I think he's done three critical things to do it.

He's applied economic pressure to restore it and to exacerbate the stress.

He's demonstrated they can't provide security and stability working with Israel in the Operation Midnight Hammer.

And lastly, he's been the first president to offer rhetorical support for the people of Iran, and I think we're seeing the results of that.

2028 is on the chopping blocks as well.