Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Interview With Former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland; Trump Administration Defying Court Orders?. Aired 1- 1:30p ET

Aired March 17, 2025 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:00:33]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Deportations, a denial and a defense, a legal clash over hundreds of deported migrants accused of being gang members to El Salvador. We're looking at every angle of this case.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Retailers sounding the alarm on the economy, as consumers say their budgets are stretched. And there could be more grim news, companies warning they could soon be forced to raise prices because of President Trump's trade war. We're keeping a close watch on the markets.

And just hours more to go after months not stuck, but kind of stuck in space. Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams are about to return to Earth, but the effects of being in zero gravity for such a long period of time could linger long after they land.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SANCHEZ: An immigration crackdown turned legal showdown. The Trump administration says it did not violate a federal judge's order by deporting hundreds of migrants suspected of being gang members to El Salvador.

Trump had granted himself sweeping powers to speed up the deportations under a centuries-old statute called the Alien Enemies Act, but a federal judge temporarily blocked the administration's ability to use that wartime law and ordered any flights carrying those migrants to turn back around to the United States. That did not happen.

CNN's Alayna Treene is following this story now live for us from the White House.

Alayna, what is the administration saying about this?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, they're pushing back very heavily, Boris, on this idea that they defied the judges order, but just to quickly take a step back, the White House was expecting these legal challenges.

When we broke the story last week that this was -- this proclamation, this order was going to come in a presidential proclamation, they knew that this was going to be met with serious backlash, in part because this is an 18th century law that was last used during World War II for the internment of Japanese Americans.

Then, it was very controversial, but it's also designed to be invoked during a time when the U.S. is at war with a foreign nation. Clearly, the United States is not at war with Venezuela, but we did hear from the president himself directly yesterday defending this and arguing that this is perhaps more dangerous than a war, this idea that there are members, as he says, of a Venezuelan gang allowed in this country.

Now, we did get to catch up -- I had an opportunity to catch up this morning with the president's border czar, as they call him, Tom Homan. He defended this very fiercely. Take a listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THOMAS HOMAN, WHITE HOUSE BORDER CZAR: The president through proclamation took his authority under the Alien Enemies Act and imposed it, which he has a right to do. TDA has been designated terrorist organizations. TDA is the enemy in this country. We know TDA, based on a lot of evidence, are part of the Maduro regime through the military and law enforcement. They have infiltrated them.

And, look, they invaded this country to unsettle this country to -- whether it's through fentanyl killing thousands of Americans or through the violence they're perpetrating our cities. The president did the right thing. And I stand by it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TREENE: So, as you could hear there, Homan really defending the president, but he also when we pushed him further, when I pushed him further, he said essentially that by the time that the plane carrying the migrants, the Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador, where they are going to be put in a prison, he said that the plane was already in U.S. territory.

It's the same line we heard from White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt yesterday, which essentially said by the time the judge's written order came through, the migrants were no longer in U.S. airspace, all to say they are trying to argue and really insisting that they did not defy the judges law.

But, look, Boris, this is not going to be the end of this fight. There's still a lot of questions over exactly how this was handled. And if this does become a bigger issue, I mean, this could be one of the most significant legal fights this administration faces, just given the nature of what it could mean if they are found to have defied this judge's ruling.

SANCHEZ: Alayna Treene live for us from the White, . Thank you so much -- Brianna.

KEILAR: And we're joined now by Chad Wolf, former acting homeland security secretary during the first Trump administration. He is now executive vice president at America First Policy Institute. Secretary, invoking this Alien Enemies Act means deportations without

a judge reviewing the cases specifically of the people deported. Do you see any issues with the deportations of these hundreds of immigrants to El Salvador, even as a judge had ordered those specific removals and others over the next two weeks paused?

[13:05:17]

CHAD WOLF, FORMER ACTING U.S. SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: Well, here's what I would tell you. I think the White House is being very judicious in how they're using that authority, which is to say they are focusing on TDA or MS-13 in the cases over the weekend.

And we know both of those groups have been designated by the president as a foreign terrorist organization. So, look, we're at war with different groups of individuals in very different ways, and, in this way, because of that designation, I think does allow some unique and new authorities, or in this case, old authorities, to be utilized to remove these dangerous individuals from the United States, protecting Americans in American communities.

Look, obviously, it's in the court system now. That will continue to play out. I will say, though, that any time a judge orders an injunction, obviously, I think the Trump administration has been very concerned about nationwide injunctions from one judge.

But even if they were to, as this judge did, issue that order, it does take some time for the administration, and in this case, DHS, to comply with that order. So I know there's a lot of talk about it was issued at this time and 10 minutes later, a flight took off. These things, in my experience, do take time to get down to the field to implement.

KEILAR: OK, because, yes, apparently there was a very short period of time, an hour and 20 minutes between the first flight taking off and this verbal order from the judge.

Obviously, there will be questions about why that was not implemented, as that hearing was hours in the making there? Look, no love lost for these gangs, right, Tren de Aragua, but American citizens, as you're aware, have been caught up in these recent raids, Puerto Ricans, Navajo, foreign-born U.S. military veterans, and a huge chunk of those rounded up have committed no criminal offense.

Do you have worries that skipping judicial review of these cases could be ripe for a big mistake?

WOLF: Well, there's nothing I have seen from the individuals that were removed over the weekend that that is the case.

And, look, the administration and in this case ICE in removing individuals...

KEILAR: But how would you know?

WOLF: Look, they continue -- they continue to do that. That's what I was just getting to.

They're vetting these individuals. They're doing background checks as they pick up these individuals and making sure that the folks that they are removing, that they are deporting either have that criminal background history or there is another reason, obviously, to remove them.

So it's not just a matter of we're picking up someone and we're putting them on the plane without doing that due diligence. So that does give me and provide some comfort that they are removing the right individuals. But, if they're not, obviously that needs to be remedied as quickly and expeditiously as possible.

KEILAR: But, I mean, just to be clear, from October of 2015 to March of 2020, many of those years when you were at the Department of Homeland Security, ICE arrested, detained, and removed potentially American citizens.

I say potentially because, as the GAO found, it was actually ICE's document keeping, I guess you could say, that didn't allow them to be as exact as they would like to in that certification. But they said there were quite a few U.S. citizens potentially, 674 arrests, 121 detained, 70 removed, according to the GAO.

So, I mean, what does that tell you about how important it is to get eyes on these individuals, considering mistakes that have been made in the past, especially during the first Trump administration?

WOLF: Well, sure.

Look, it's always important that we -- you need to make sure that you're removing the right individuals from the United States. But, look, I'm going to err on the side of caution as far as protecting the American people. And that's making sure that we get terrorist- designated individuals and organizations out of the country as quickly as possible.

And so that -- instead of trying to plan for a hypothetical that could be now or it could be months in the making, let's make sure that we're getting rid of individuals that are here that pose a threat to the United States and to our people.

And so, again, we need to make sure -- you need to have all the safeguards in place to make sure that ICE is removing the right folks. I don't have any evidence that they're not over this past weekend. And so I think we need to give them the benefit of the doubt and make sure that we're removing the right people, but that we do that as quickly as possible.

KEILAR: OK, so CNN has learned of a family in which the parents and one of their children are undocumented, but the rest of the kids are U.S. citizens. They were stopped when they were at an internal CBP checkpoint in Texas while they were taking their 10-year-old American citizen daughter to brain cancer treatment in Houston. The parents have no criminal record.

[13:10:03]

Obviously, you emphasize protecting Americans from people. I mean, do you see a case being made for this in that priority?

WOLF: Well, again, I don't know the case that you're talking about there, but I think what you described is perhaps the children are citizens, but the parents are here in the country illegally.

And this all goes back to the rule of law, which is, we're going to make sure that the folks that are here have a legal right to be in the United States. And those that do not, again, we're not going to -- I think the Trump administration has been very clear about this. They're not going to exempt whole classes of individuals from the law.

We saw what the Biden administration did in that case, and then we saw the crisis occur at the border. So all of these cases are very, very unique. The instance that you gave, there's a lot of detail there that obviously I don't have.

But what I would say is making sure that folks that -- here in the country that remain here in the country have a legal right to be here. So, again, the case that you used, I don't know if they have applied for some type of relief, if they have not. Have they been denied by an immigration judge?

There's a lot of detail here that goes into each and every one of these cases, and every circumstance is very unique.

KEILAR: It sounds like they were in the process of trying to help their child and are obviously now caught up in this.

I do just want to ask you before I let you go, because you have been in Secretary Noem's position before, how would you judge the execution of DHS at this point? Is there room for improvement?

WOLF: Look, I think what the department has done overall in these first 50 or so days has been remarkable.

I think they had a big and a high hurdle, a lot of expectations on making sure that they're executing not only on the removal process that we have been talking about, but also all the different measures that they have put in place along the border. And I think that the speed and the velocity at which they have done that has been remarkable and have -- they have been able to change the tide along that border.

And as they move forward, I think to get the numbers the president wants to see on the deportation flights, they have got to continue to improve on that. And I think they will over time.

KEILAR: Chad Wolf, thanks for being with us.

WOLF: Thank you.

KEILAR: Boris.

SANCHEZ: Joining us is CNN legal analyst and former Assistant Director of ICE Elliot Williams.

Elliot, thanks so much for being with us.

Walk us through the key language in the law that Trump is using to speed up these deportations, the Alien Enemies Act.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Right, Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

And, Boris, I want to draw your attention really to two sentences in here, and let's go right to them. So it triggers these immigration authorities' ability to remove people when there is a -- quote -- "declared war between the United States and a foreign nation or government" -- and here's one that the administration is relying on -- "any invasion or predatory incursion," right?

That's the language they're latching onto here, making the argument that gang members coming into the United States necessarily are an incursion. Now, it's tricky because they're not a foreign government, right? And, again, they shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies of the United States.

That's really what's at issue here.

What are other occasions on which this act has been invoked? Because it's very rare. I think it's only three times.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: Three times, you got it. And it's very rare, number one, the War of 1812, going back that far, number two, World War I, the internment of Austro-Hungarians. That's something you haven't heard about since 11th grade history, and also sort of tragically in American history the internment camps of Japanese citizens during World War II, only three times.

And that sort of adds to how remarkable this moment is in trying to use this authority.

SANCHEZ: And, again, all of these were against foreign government, citizens of foreign governments, not exactly a transnational gang...

WILLIAMS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: ... which is a little bit more amorphous.

The plaintiffs in this case, the ACLU and Democracy Forward, they want the judge to immediately get sworn statements from people involved in the deportation process. What are they looking for?

WILLIAMS: Now, again, there was a hearing on Saturday Boris at which the judge ordered once -- he issued an oral ruling and then issued a written one later. Now, here's the sort of big language -- let's use green for St. Patrick's Day, where he uses the words, whether turning around a plane, right, or not embarking anyone on the plane.

There is a question at issue here as to whether these planes of people being removed to South and Central America were already airborne, had landed in the foreign country, sort of before or after the judge had issued his ruling. Now, that's relevant. If the judge says, I want you to turn these planes around, and I issue a ruling asking you to turn these planes around, and they're airborne and don't, then there's a possibility that the federal government defied this order of the judge.

That's what's at issue here. And, notably, those questions that he's asking specifically are, number one, did a flight take off after he issued a ruling? Number two, did any flight land after the judge's ruling? Number three, was any flight in the air after the judge's rulings? And, number four, were any individuals in the custody of a foreign government?

[13:15:11]

We can't, as America, deal with anybody else. We can't take custody of them once home country takes control.

SANCHEZ: Yes, we will see what the answers are here.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: What is the legal argument from the Trump administration, at least publicly on camera?

WILLIAMS: Sure.

SANCHEZ: Rhetorically, they're arguing these are gang members.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Nobody should be focusing on them, empathizing with them. But there are serious legal questions here about the process itself.

WILLIAMS: Right.

And Secretary Wolf just a moment ago talked -- used that language of these are violent gang members in the United States, and it's, in fact, an incursion into the United States. But, notably, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt made this sort of a broader political point. If Democrats want to argue in favor of turning a plane full of, and here's the language, rapists, murderers, and gangsters back to the United States, that's a fight we are more than happy to take.

Now, this is fair, and it's politically a sound, resonant point, but it's misleading with respect to the legal issue. The legal issue at question, at issue here is, did the government defy a judge's order and what is the language of this Alien Enemies Act? Those two questions are what's relevant here.

The fact that is, rapists and so on, they're not sympathetic figures, but it might be a violation of federal immigration law to kick them out of the country right now in this way, in this way.

SANCHEZ: Right, a really fascinating case. Elliot Williams, always appreciate the analysis.

WILLIAMS: Thanks, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Thanks so much for joining us.

Still ahead: President Trump says that power plants, land, and dividing up certain assets are all on the table when he talks to Russian leader Vladimir Putin one-on-one tomorrow about the war in Ukraine. We're going to preview that call coming up.

Plus, dozens killed after at least 80 reported tornadoes touch down across the country, the storms leaving the trail of devastation.

Stay with CNN NEWS CENTRAL. We're taking a quick break. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:21:19]

KEILAR: The Kremlin is now confirming what President Trump said yesterday, that he will be speaking on the phone tomorrow with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

And this call is coming as negotiators from Washington, Moscow and Kyiv have been working to end Russia's war in Ukraine. Overnight, President Trump revealed some of the key sticking points that still need to be hammered out before a peace agreement is reached.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think we will be talking about land. It's a lot of land. It's a lot different than it was before the war, as you know. And we will be talking about land. We will be talking about power plants. That's a -- it's a big question.

We're already talking about that, dividing up certain assets, yes, and they have been working on that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: I'm joined now by former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union during President Trump's first term Gordon Sondland.

Ambassador, thank you so much for being with us.

And I wonder what you're looking for in this call tomorrow. What the president should be emphasizing and maybe any concerns about what he may be emphasizing.

GORDON SONDLAND, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE EUROPEAN UNION: I think that this call is going to be the culmination of a lot of negotiations that have gone on quietly with Steve Witkoff and others.

And I think now that essentially Zelenskyy has been put in a box and he has a deal, I think the Trump administration feels more comfortable in keeping him sort of up to date on what's going on with Putin, because, at the end of the day, there is no deal that's worth doing if it's not a locked-in deal that has security guarantees.

Because once Putin gets whatever he's going to get out of this deal, whether it's part of the 18 percent of the country he's already taken or a power plant or a border moved, the deal has to be, he doesn't get anymore. That's it, forever.

KEILAR: What does that look like in terms of a security guarantee that would actually deter Putin from doing what he has done over and over again?

SONDLAND: Well, the first thing it entails is boots on the ground, and hopefully not our boots on the ground.

This is now the time for the Europeans to shine and to put their people in a peacekeeping position essentially with an indemnification from us that, if there were some kind of an overwhelming invasion, that we would back them up. But even a more important security guarantee is an enormous amount of U.S. investment in Russia, not just on the minerals, but all kinds of things.

KEILAR: You mean Ukraine, in investment, yes.

SONDLAND: I'm sorry. Did I say -- yes, I did I say Russia? Yes.

KEILAR: Well, these days, I can't be sure, so I just want to make sure you meant Ukraine.

SONDLAND: Yes. Thanks for waking me up. In Ukraine.

And when Putin realizes that we have thousands of Americans there doing business and doing research and doing mining and making banking deals, he knows that any kind of a strike or an invasion attempt is a direct attack on us. That's a whole different can of worms.

KEILAR: So what makes you think Putin would agree to European boots on the ground, considering his reticence, the reticence of Russian officials to accept anything like that?

SONDLAND: He doesn't have a choice. He's very depleted in terms of people and in terms of materiel. If he wants to keep fighting and he tells Trump to piss off, then what Trump is going to do is start surging weapons back, but this time without the kinds of restrictions that the Biden administration put on Zelenskyy.

KEILAR: You of all people are well aware of the personal animus between Zelenskyy and Trump -- this has been long-running -- and sort of a bit of a, if I may say, bromance between Trump and Putin. He just seems to get along much better than -- him on a personal level. I don't think anyone would dispute that.

[13:25:04]

Do you have any concerns about how that is going to factor into these negotiations?

SONDLAND: I respectfully don't accept the premise that there's...

KEILAR: Which one?

SONDLAND: Both of them, that there's a bromance and that there's animus.

KEILAR: Really?

SONDLAND: Yes.

I think you can attenuate both of those. I think, with Zelenskyy, to be fair to Zelenskyy, Zelenskyy is fighting for an existential issue. He's either -- it's binary. Either Ukraine exists or it doesn't. It becomes part of Russia. Those are the stakes for Zelenskyy.

The stakes for Putin are, well, I had a swing and a miss. I will take another shot at it later. But Russia continues to exist and survive. So there are very, very different dynamics going on here. And I think Trump was smart to get the deal with Zelenskyy done first. Then he could pivot to Putin and say, dude, I have gotten you the best deal you're going to get, but you don't get another inch of Ukrainian land.

KEILAR: I have about 40 follow-up questions for you. However, we do have to go to the White House, because the briefing is under way. And let's listen into what's happening there.

QUESTION: The administration can prove everyone that was put on those flights to El Salvador was either a member of Tren de Aragua, MS-13, or some other entity?

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Yes. We have already provided the breakdown in the effort of transparency about the 261 illegal aliens who were deported; 137 of those were deported under the Alien Enemies Act; 101 of those were Venezuelans removed via Title 8, which, as you know, are just regular immigration proceedings.

And 23 of them were MS-13 Salvadoran gang members. There were also two MS-13 ringleaders as part of that group of 23 who President Bukele particularly expressed his gratitude for their return so he can demand justice in his home country.

Jennifer.

QUESTION: What criteria other than, say, tattoos or maybe being in the wrong place at the wrong time, are you are they using to determine that someone is actually a member of one of these organizations?

LEAVITT: Intelligence and the men and women on the ground in the interior of our country who are finally being allowed to do their jobs. Their hands were tied under the previous administration. And, as I said, they take their jobs very seriously. They should be trusted and respected by the American public with this operation.

And, of course, as I said to Kelly, the administration will provide all details to the questions that the court poses.

Jennifer.

QUESTION: One more follow-up on that. Can you say how much the U.S. is paying El Salvador to imprison these Venezuelans? And then a different question on Russia. I was wondering if you could give us an update on cease-fire negotiations, and is there anything you can share on the list that Putin gave, passed along to President Trump for the things he's requesting?

LEAVITT: Sure.

To your first question, it was approximately $6 million to El Salvador for the detention of these foreign terrorists. And I would point out that is pennies on the dollar in comparison to the cost of life and the cost it would impose on the American taxpayer to house these terrorists in maximum security prisons here in the United States of America.

And I would echo the message of our secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who expressed his gratitude to President Bukele and El Salvador's government for their cooperation in this deal. As for Russia, as you know, the president announced last night on Air Force One on his return from his very busy weekend in Florida that he will be speaking to President Putin tomorrow.

I won't get ahead of those negotiations, but I can say we are on the 10th yard line of peace, and we have never been closer to a peace deal than we are in this moment. And the president, as you know, is determined to get one done.

(CROSSTALK)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: Karoline.

LEAVITT: Sure.

COLLINS: I have two questions for you, one on the flights, but first on the president's post overnight saying that he is -- the pardons that were issued by President Biden preemptively to members of the January 6 Committee, that they're now null and void.

Have attorneys here at the White House told President Trump that he is the legal authority to undo a pardon simply because it was signed by auto pen, as he said?

LEAVITT: The president was begging the question that I think a lot of journalists in this room should be asking about whether or not the former president of the United States, who I think we can all finally agree was cognitively impaired -- I know it took people some time to finally admit that, but we all know that to be true, as evidenced by his disastrous debate performance against President Trump during the campaign.

I digress on that. But the president was raising the point that did the president even know about these pardons? Was his legal signature used without his consent or knowledge? And that's not just the president or me raising those questions, Kaitlan.

According to "The New York Post," there are Biden officials from the previous White House who raised those questions and wondered if the president was even consulted about his legally binding signature being signed onto documents.

And so I think it's a question that everybody in this room should be looking into, because certainly that would propose perhaps criminal or illegal behavior if staff members were signing the president of the United States' autograph without his consent.