Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Hegseth Says U.S. Aims to Be Unpredictable About Boots on Ground; Russian Oil Tanker Docks in Cuba Amid Energy Crisis; Supreme Court Rules Against Law Banning Conversion Therapy for Gay and Trans Youth; January 6 Rioters Seeks Million in Court for Physical and Emotional Harm; Delta Flight Makes Emergency Landing After Engine Catches Fire; Buckingham Palace Confirms King Charles Will Visit Trump Next Month. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired March 31, 2026 - 13:30   ET

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

[13:30:00]

ISABEL ROSALES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: - urine test. And that's notable because Florida has a new law back in 2025 that it passed, where if you refuse a breath, blood or urine sample, a test, well, that's an automatic misdemeanor and a one-year license suspension. Now, we're going to hear more about this case. He has an arraignment scheduled for April 23rd. Guys?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": All right, Isabel, thank you for the latest there. Still ahead, Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth says the next few days will "be decisive" in the war with Iran. We'll have the latest on the conflict next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth says the next few days will be decisive in the war with Iran. And he's not ruling out putting American boots on the ground. He says the U.S. military will continue to "negotiate with bombs." At the same time, the Trump administration is pursuing a deal to end the war.

[13:35:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, UNITED STATES DEFENSE SECRETARY: On the talks, I can tell you, having been with Steve and Jared and the vice president, Marco and many others yesterday, they are very real. They are ongoing. They're active and I think gaining strength. And we appreciate that.

As I said in my remarks, we would much prefer to get a deal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Let's get some perspective with Mark Esper. He's a former Defense Secretary under President Trump. He also serves on the board or as a strategic adviser for a handful of aerospace and defense- related companies. Secretary, thanks so much for sharing part of your afternoon with us. So as you hear Secretary Hegseth say the U.S. military wants to be unpredictable when it comes to having American forces on the ground, how likely do you think it is we'll see U.S. troops on Iranian territory?

MARK ESPER, FORMER DEFENSE SECRETARY UNDER PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, good afternoon, first of all, Boris. Look, I think it is right for the president and the secretary of defense to not take any options off the table. You don't want to signal to the enemy what you may or may not do. And further, I would add, because I did it during my time, it's important that the Pentagon also put forces in place to give the president as many options as possible.

Again, not necessarily signaling that he will do it, but again, giving the president options. So I think those statements have been fair. Now, whether or not it will happen, I think, depends on April 6th. That is the supposed timeline by which President Trump has said that the Iranians have to come back and make a deal with regard to the 15- point proposal. And I assume that at that point, if they don't, the president has a few options.

One, he can either extend the timeline again, which he's done a couple of times already. Secondly, he could stand down and declare victory and say to the allies, like it happened in the last 24 hours, you resolve the issue with the Strait. Or he could put troops into Iran and I think it's a possibility that he could do that to gain some leverage, either up north at Kharg Island or down south in the Strait of Hormuz in order to rid the Strait of Iranian systems that could attack ships.

SANCHEZ: Yeah. When it comes to Trump telling allies like the UK, go ahead and take the Strait and figure this out, how likely is that to happen? What could it look like? And how do you perceive European allies to receive that kind of message?

ESPER: Well, it's unlikely to happen. And obviously, the allies are not happy because they don't feel like they were consulted in the beginning. And I understand that. I completely get that. But on the other hand, I share the president's frustration that they have not been willing to support the United States with basic things.

I mean, we know of NATO allies who have denied the United States Air Force's use of their airspace. And to me, that just is unconscionable. That doesn't sit well with me, either. So I think if the allies should support the United States to a degree, it will take some time. I know, having done this during my tenure, in 2019, we'd set up something called Operation Sentinel, the purpose of which was to escort ships back and forth to the Persian Gulf, because at that time, the Iranians were stopping ships, threatening ships, putting mines on ships.

And so we, the United States, the United States Navy, knows how to do this. We've practiced it with the allies. So it is something that's doable, but it comes with a lot of risk and complexity.

SANCHEZ: So as the U.S. relationship with some of these European allies, specifically, is getting a bit fraught in terms of what they can do in Iran and in the Persian Gulf, some of our adversaries have been helping Tehran.

Hegseth today said that the U.S. is aware that countries are providing intelligence on U.S. assets to Iran. CNN had previously reported that it was Russia, the Kremlin, that provided the location of American troops, ships and aircraft. What could be done to stop that? What can the administration do to mitigate the effect of that intelligence sharing?

ESPER: Well, of course, you know, depending on the type and scope, what you can do is confront them diplomatically, right, as should be done. You could threaten sanctions on or return of sanctions on the Russians. You could jam them using technical means to cut off some of that information. You could threaten to provide additional assistance in the case of the Russians, additional assistance and targeting and other information to the Ukrainians.

So there is a panoply of things that you could try. We don't know whether or not the administration has done so yet, but I think it would be important to remove that from Iran to deny them that information from Russia. I should also note that there has been a concern that Russia may also be supplying Shahed drones to Iran via the Caspian Sea. And so, that's another source of material support that we would need to shut down as well.

SANCHEZ: I wanted to get your thoughts, Secretary, on some new reporting from CNN that, though Hegseth didn't push for Epic Fury as an operation, three sources have told our Zach Cohen and Kristen Holmes that the secretary downplayed the risk of this spiraling out of control to President Trump. What do you make of that?

[13:40:00]

ESPER: You know, I don't know until you get some type of confirmed report about who said what and when and how. People will interpret things differently around the -- or in those situation room meetings and what they are. You know, obviously every member of the cabinet has a responsibility to present to the president his or her views.

And my view has always been present not just the pros, but the cons, the ups and the downs and the consequences. Particularly, you know, when you look at the broader picture of not just a military situation, but the economics, the international dynamics, all those other things that would impact the president and what he's trying to achieve. Again, not just in a narrow sense, but broadly in terms of taking the United States forward.

SANCHEZ: Former Defense Secretary, Mark Esper, thanks so much for sharing your perspective.

ESPER: Thank you, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Of course. Brianna?

KEILAR: We're following some Breaking News out of Cuba, which is where a Russian-flagged tanker carrying more than 700,000 barrels of oil has now docked. And this is happening after the president suspended his administration's fuel blockade against the island as its energy crisis deepens.

CNN's Patrick Oppmann is live in Matanzas, Cuba, which is where that tanker is docked. Patrick, I wonder what you can see and also what this means to have this oil available to the island.

PATRICK OPPMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Listen, this is incredibly significant. It's the first oil that's come into this country in over three months, according to Cuban officials. It's not just any oil. We are talking about oil that is coming from Russia, a country that has not been sending oil donations to Cuba regularly.

We've been getting more oil from Venezuela and Mexico, but those shipments were cut off under this oil blockade. So for Cubans to have an oil shipment come in, it means essentially they're not alone, they're not cut off. And then to have it come from their old ally, Russia, their Cold War ally, Russia, the former Soviet Union, for them, it just couldn't be more symbolic.

So we should point out, though, that as the oil is being unloaded behind this, it's going to be refined. That takes a while. It's a lengthy process. Turn it into diesel, we believe, to operate this country's power plants. But it's only going to really give enough oil for perhaps a week or two. This is not solving Cuba's energy problems, and it remains unresolved if the Trump administration will allow further donations to come forward.

It seems like this is something of a one-off, a humanitarian gesture, or they just do not want to pick a fight with Vladimir Putin at this moment, because he very clearly has decided to send the shipment of oil to the Cuban government, a lifeline. But moving forward, we heard Donald Trump say that Cuba remains in the sights of his administration, that his intention is to cause this government here to open up, to not stay as a single-party communist state, to open up the economy, which is something Cubans have said they would like to see.

And if that doesn't happen, then squeeze them more and more, and he's not ruled out military action either. So this is help, but it's not certainly the salvation that they're still looking for.

KEILAR: And what is the status, Patrick, of communications between the U.S. and Cuba at this point?

OPPMANN: You know, we know from Cuban officials that they've really only had one in-person meeting. These are two sides that don't have a lot of trust, needless to say. Marco Rubio, Secretary of State on the U.S. side, of course, is Cuban-American, so he is well-versed in how the Cuban government works. He has been a lifelong critic of the Cuban government.

And so some of the concessions the Cuban government has made, which are not major concessions by any definition of them, because they say they will not make major concessions, you know, Marco Rubio has immediately swatted those down and said, you know, this is not what we're talking about.

He's talking about a sea change here, where the government opens up, where you do not have communist leadership, where he would like to see the president of Cuba step down, who he said has been an obstacle to change and the economy really opened up, which he says is a main obstacle to prosperity on this island. Of course, the Cuban government fires back very angrily at all that.

But when they're in the position they are in, which is they're being squeezed at this moment, where Donald Trump apparently can decide when the oil comes in and when it does not, very easily could go for another three months without oil, which would be devastating to this island. And so they are really at the mercy of the U.S. government, despite from the -- despite this very key aid that Vladimir Putin has sent right here behind me.

KEILAR: Patrick Oppmann, right by that Russian tanker that has been allowed to dock there in Cuba. Thank you for that report.

And coming up, the Supreme Court just ruling against a law banning conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ kids. We'll have reaction ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:49:24]

SANCHEZ: Today, a major Supreme Court decision that proponents call a big win for the First Amendment, but some critics call dangerous for America's youth. In an 8-1 ruling, the high court sided with a religious counselor challenging Colorado's ban on so-called conversion therapy for gay and transgender minors.

KEILAR: It's a controversial practice of seeking to change a child's sexual orientation or gender identity. Research has found that the practice doesn't work, and it's been linked to long-term mental and physical health problems. CNN Chief Supreme Court Analyst, Joan Biskupic is here with us.

[13:50:00]

Question here was this talk therapy of conversion therapy, and there are so many bans in states across the country. What is it going to mean nationwide?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Right. This is for a slice of this kind of therapy and it's only talk therapy. That's why the First Amendment was implicated and also because of how Colorado had written its law. If a therapist, this was a case brought by a Christian therapist against the state of Colorado, the law specified that if a therapist wanted to affirm someone who, you know, came in to talk to her about being gay or being trans, it would be OK to talk to that child to support that child and accept that child.

But if a child came in and said, I don't want to be this way, can you help me not be this way? That's where it kicked in. And in fact, Justice Kagan wrote in her concurrence, and I think we should talk about, you know, the liberal justices went with the conservative majority on this one. She said it, essentially, the state is suppressing one side of the argument.

And that's the thing to keep in mind, is that this was a pure First Amendment question. The state and the dissent by Ketanji Brown Jackson really wanted to focus on this, you know, maybe this kind of speech is incidental to what's happening here. But Neil Gorsuch, who wrote for the majority, said no, it was core. And let me just tell you the two comments from each side.

Neil Gorsuch, who wrote for the eight-member majority said, Colorado may regard its policy as essential to public health and safety, going to what you said, Bri, about, you know, the dangers of it. But, Gorsuch went on, the First Amendment stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country.

Now, Justice Jackson, in her dissent, really tried to point out that this kind of regulation should be looked at almost like medical malpractice, rather than as going to core First Amendment speech. And she said, the decision, it threatens to impair states' ability to regulate the provision of medical care in any respect.

It extends the Constitution into uncharted territory in an utterly irrational fashion, and it ultimately risks grave harm to Americans' health and well-being. What she was saying is, if states can't go after a discredited practice, then, you know, in fact, she used the phrase, a dangerous can of worms. It would be opening a dangerous can of worms.

And with the majority, again, with two liberals, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, siding with the majority said, no, in this case, Colorado has kind of tipped the scales in one direction, in favor of people who would affirm someone who wanted to talk about being gay or trans, but not helping someone who wanted to maybe think about alternatives.

SANCHEZ: Sure. Joan, what was the reaction in the courtroom when this decision came out?

BISKUPIC: Well, it was interesting because, you know, here we are, you know, at the end of March, and we usually don't have dissents from the bench at this point. That's something that happens in June, where a dissenting justice is so fired up that he or she feels like underscoring that with a dissent from the bench.

But after Neil Gorsuch read his majority opinion for about 10 minutes, you know, the highlights, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the sole dissenter, goes on for much longer than that. And in the opinion itself, it's much longer, saying how catastrophic this is, how bad this is.

And you know, it's -- she was really alone. Now, she has been alone in other instances here, but this -- she was saying that you don't know what you're getting into here, because this is really going to be dangerous for states trying to regulate not just this kind of therapy, but all sorts of other medical practices.

SANCHEZ: Yeah. Joan Biskupic, thank you so much for that reporting.

Now to some of the other headlines we're watching this hour. Several people who were at the U.S. Capitol during the January 6th insurrection are suing the police agencies that tried to defend the building that day. The group wants a federal court to award them more than $18 million in damages for the physical and emotional injuries they say they were inflicted on them by law enforcement.

The class-action suit claims the use of tear gas and other crowd control measures were an unjustified response, even though a large mob of President Trump supporters stormed the building that day and attacked law enforcement. CNN has reached out to U.S. Capitol Police for comment. The D.C. Metro Police Department declined to comment.

KEILAR: Plus, this is not a sight you want to see after takeoff. No way. A Delta flight was heading from Sao Paulo, Brazil to Atlanta on Sunday when passengers saw flames. People can be heard pleading for the plane to turn around. The pilots were able to return to the airport safely.

Delta says a mechanical issue involving the left engine was to blame. We can almost diagnose that as well. Can't we, Boris?

(LAUGH)

KEILAR: And King Charles' first state visit to the U.S. will go ahead next month despite calls by some U.K. lawmakers for the trip to be delayed over objections to the Iran war.

[13:55:00]

Buckingham Palace says King Charles and Queen Camilla are making the trip on the advice of the U.K. government and at the invitation of President Trump. The King's visit in late April comes after Trump has repeatedly criticized the U.K. government over its response to the war.

On Monday, British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer reiterated his position on the conflict saying, this is not our war and we're not going to get drawn into it.

And the countdown is on. We have new details on the historic moon mission launching tomorrow.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)