A heated debate erupted among commentators during a CNN broadcast on Wednesday following an announcement by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that the Trump administration will halt plans to feature abolitionist Harriet Tubman on the 20-dollar bill.
The discussion, hosted by anchor Abby Phillip, centered on which historical figures deserve representation on American currency after the administration shifted priorities away from the decade-old redesign initiative.
>>> Padres Weigh Mason Miller Trade to Fix Roster Weaknesses
Panelists Divided on Currency Choices
Panelist Brianna Lyman defended the decision to keep Andrew Jackson on the bill, noting that the selection process for currency is highly limited.
"Look, you put faces on money to commemorate American icons," said Trump loyalist Brianna Lyman.
"There are only a limited number of bills, one, two, five, ten, 20, 100, fifty, so there has to be a very selective process."
Lyman added that Andrew Jackson saved the union during the Nullification Crisis, served as a war hero in 1815, and vetoed the second bank charter to limit elite power, prompting a direct question from the host regarding opposition to Tubman.
"What's the argument for Harriet Tubman?" asked Lyman.
The question drew a sharp reaction from the anchor, who questioned whether a historical overview was necessary to explain Tubman's significance.
"What's the argument for Harriet Tubman?" responded CNN anchor Abby Phillip.
"Do we have to do a history lesson?"
Phillip further argued that conservatives should favor Tubman because she was an everyday American hero and a gun-toting abolitionist.
