Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Iran Asks for Ceasefire; Trump to Go to Supreme Court; Terry Virts is Interviewed about NASA's Moon Mission; Son Testifies in Father's Trial. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired April 01, 2026 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: So, you had a fling with a flip phone.

BILL WEIR, CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT: I fooled around with a dumb phone. And it turns out my dumb phone brain is much quicker and much better connected than my smartphone scrolling brain. I found -- I learned this through the Month Offline Club, who met at the first phone free bar in D.C., a great place called Hush Harbor. And for them, they were looking to less doomscrolling, more connection, more eye contact. And it pays off in ways that really is hard to describe.

BERMAN: Oh, this sounds so cool. All right, I can't wait to see this story. Bill, you've got me hooked here. I'm glad to see you guys are back together. You worked things out.

WEIR: We're back together.

BERMAN: Be sure to tune in to a whole new hour of "The Whole Story" airs Saturday at 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific on CNN. And watch on the CNN app.

And a brand-new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, the breaking news, President Trump just issued a new statement, now claiming that Iran just asked the United States for a ceasefire.

And all eyes on the Supreme Court this morning as the president himself says that he is heading there very soon to sit in for the oral arguments about to take place over his push to end birthright citizenship.

And we're going to show you live pictures at the Kennedy Space Center. Just hours from now, an historic moment, an historic launch into deep space. The mission that will be happening, something that we haven't seen in five decades.

I'm Kate Bolduan, with Sara Sidner and John Berman. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news. BERMAN: All right, there is breaking news. Breaking news in the sense

that President Trump has issued a new statement about Iran. Whether it's new, that remains to be seen.

What the president said is that Iran's president is asking for a ceasefire. But let me read this precisely. "Iran's new regime president, much less radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors, has just asked the United States of America for a ceasefire. We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion, or as they say, back to the stone ages."

A couple things I want to point out here. The person he's calling the new regime president, as far as we know, is the same regime president that they've had for some time, Pezeshkian. He was the president before the bombing. He's still the president now.

Pezeshkian made a statement yesterday suggesting that Iran would stop fighting if they stopped being attacked. So, I'm not sure whether or not the president is merely reacting to the statement that was made yesterday. We'll find out in a moment.

And also, I should say, this is a bit of a reversal from what the president said yesterday, where he said the United States very well could end this war without the Strait of Hormuz being open. Now, he's suggesting the United States won't stop until it is open, free and clear. So, a new contradiction there.

Let's get to CNN's Kristen Holmes, live at the White House this morning, maybe for some clarity on if something new has been said from the same Iranian president who was president yesterday.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: John, I really desperately wish that I could give you some clarity on this, but you're reading the same statement I am, and it is incredibly confusing. I mean it's not only just a little bit of a reversal, it is a full reversal from what he said on the Strait of Hormuz and what we were hearing behind the scenes, that the White House had come to this belief that they could not promise to reopen the Strait of Hormuz as a prerequisite to ending the war with Iran. And they were essentially stopping talking about it. You saw President Trump saying it's not our problem, putting it on our European allies. Now we are in a full reversal, going back to where we were two days ago when he was saying that he was going to bomb them to oblivion then if they did not reopen the Strait. So, a lot of questions that we're putting to the White House now after this post.

Now, of course, the other part of this is this idea of Iran's new regime president, which you just mentioned. President Trump has been talking about this regime change -- and I'm putting that in quotes -- now for the last several days, saying it's been achieved in Iran. That there's a new, more rational, reasonable regime in Iran. That is not, as you noted, the indication that we have on any of these fronts. I mean just to keep in mind, you mentioned the president also on the other side, the new supreme leader is somebody we haven't seen yet, and there's a lot of speculation about that. But he's also the son of the last supreme leader. So, they are in line there when it comes to the same theocracy, the same ideals.

You also have Ghalibaf, who is the parliamentary speaker, who has been, we are told by various sources, part of this kind of back deal negotiating. They have been passing notes through Pakistan and Turkey. He is also seen as someone who's close to the new supreme leader. And so that's why they believe he might have more authority.

So, we had also just reported two days ago that there was some confusion even among Americans and our allies.

[09:05:04]

And by Americans I mean U.S. officials, as to making sure that the people they were talking to had enough power to actually do something to implement the end of the war. And now President Trump seems to be saying that there is somebody new in power that we have not heard about, that they are negotiating with. And just a reminder, all of the things I've told you about the negotiations, that is stuff that we have heard and we have learned from sources. The White House, the administration, has been very cagey as to who it is exactly they're talking to. But a lot to get to the bottom of here, particularly as it comes to the Strait of Hormuz and what he means in terms of this new regime.

BERMAN: Yes. OK, just to be clear, the one thing we do know is this statement released not long before the markets open, when the president likes to make some news, apparently, on Iran.

Secondly --

HOLMES: That's true. That's a good point to point out. Yes.

BERMAN: And again, and we just don't know, this raises more questions. You did a great job laying out all the questions that this new statement does raise. Got to get some answers. We got to work for some answers here to see if this is something new and if this is from a new person inside Iran, other than the president who has been president there for some time.

Kristen Holmes, at the White House, thank you so much for helping us try to understand what's happening now.

Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, thank you, John.

Any moment now we are expecting President Donald Trump to leave the White House for the Supreme Court. In an historic first, he said he plans to attend oral arguments in person on his effort to limit birthright citizenship, the right of people born here in the U.S. to be citizens.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And I'm going.

REPORTER: You're going to go to the Supreme Court tomorrow?

TRUMP: I think so. I do believe.

REPORTER: And just sit there and listen?

TRUMP: Because I have listened to this argument for so long.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: And now he'll listen to more arguments. His order, which he signed on the first day of his second term, seeks to end citizenship rights for babies born to undocumented immigrants and temporary foreign visitors. Something the president has called birth tourism. The ACLU says ending birthright citizenship would upend the law and the lives of hundreds of thousands of families by denying citizenship to people in the only country they have ever called home. It's worth noting that every lower court, considering the legality of this order, has ruled against it.

CNN chief legal affairs correspondent Paula Reid outside the Supreme Court right now.

This is an historic moment. First of all, looking at this just in general, the court took this up. But secondly, that the president is going to be sitting there listening to oral arguments this morning.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, no doubt, this is an historic day. And we expect a packed house in the Supreme Court behind me as the justices contemplate what will likely be a truly historic ruling.

As you noted, this is all focused on the president's efforts to limit birthright citizenship. And he did this through an executive order. And since he signed that order, it has been tied up in courts, finally arrived here at the Supreme Court, where today's arguments are going to focus on the Fourteenth Amendment, which was -- it was put forth right after the Civil War. And it says that you are a citizen if you are born here, and if you are subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

Now, those are the words that people are really going to be focused on today, subject to the jurisdiction thereof. I've spoken with a senior Justice Department official who tells me that they're going to argue that if you are, for example, here illegally, if you are on a short term visa, if you are a tourist, you are not a citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment because you don't have the correct domicile. You're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That is the gist of their argument.

But they clearly have an uphill battle here. This is going to be argued by the solicitor general of the United States. Now, he has pulled off some really impressive victories for President Trump at the Supreme Court. But most legal experts agree that he is going to have a tough time convincing the court that it has been wrong for over 100 years on this particular amendment. Now, on the other side, they're going to be arguing that, in fact,

this ruling, if it went for the government, that this would be far broader than what the government is saying. It could potentially throw into chaos the immigration status of millions of Americans.

And, Sara, another thing that I'm looking for are any questions about the logistics here, because this is something that is not exactly clear how you would go about implementing this. Interestingly, Justice Kavanaugh grilled the solicitor general on this previously when a different issue was before the court. So, it's clear that the justices know that, look, even if they do manage to pull off a legal victory, there are a lot of questions about how exactly this would work.

Now, we know from the tariffs case a couple weeks ago, the Supreme Court is perfectly fine issuing an opinion and saying, look, you need to figure out the fine print and the logistics. But we won't know what they decide likely until June.

SIDNER: Yes, but all in all, it's fascinating to watch and has a lot of people worried.

[09:10:01]

Paula Reid, thank you so much for your reporting there from outside the Supreme Court.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: All right, let's talk much more about this. With me now, CNN's senior legal analyst Elie Honig is here.

You have predicted, to quote, "near-certain doom" of Trump's effort here. Why, Elie? Talk to me about what you see here.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Because Donald Trump is pushing against 157 years of legal history and of precedent. So, the constitutional amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment itself, which comes from 1868, tells us straightforwardly that any person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof is a citizen. We have understood that. Congress has understood that. The courts have understood that. We, as a political entity, have understood that to mean that if you're born here, you're a citizen here with only very narrow exceptions.

What Trump is asking to do is to expand that to say, it actually does not apply to you if the parent is here illegally, which is a major change --

BOLDUAN: Yes.

HONIG: Or even if the parent is here legally, but temporarily. And that's why Trump has lost every lower court decision. So, I think the Supreme Court is going to go that way as well.

BOLDUAN: What -- even with that said, the dynamics between the justices and how they -- how they ask their questions, or what they say is always very important and, just frankly, interesting and always historic. Who are you going to be watching or what are you going to be listening for?

HONIG: I'm going to be looking to those conservative justices who have shown some ideological flexibility, specifically Amy Coney Barrett --

BOLDUAN: Right.

HONIG: Brett Kavanaugh, Chief Justice John Roberts. The key phrase that I think people are going to hear an awful lot of, starting at 10:00 a.m., is that phrase I said before, subject to the jurisdiction thereof. That's the whole ball game. Because nobody questions what it means to be born here. The Trump administration is saying, well, if you're from another country and you're here, you're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. I think that's a majorly problematic argument, because look how many people are here illegally or temporarily. Of course they're subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

BOLDUAN: Right.

HONIG: Of course they can be arrested, prosecuted, you name it, all the things the government does to citizens. So, I'm going to listen for how the justices focus on those five words.

BOLDUAN: I've had the very fortunate opportunity, I have to say, because I loved every chance I had, to sit in on oral arguments many times. And there's no like conferring between attorneys here.

HONIG: Right.

BOLDUAN: It's not -- this is a very, very, very, very different courtroom, if you will. I mean, when they're laying out their arguments and being peppered with questions by the justices, the attorney for the administration, they're on an island of their own.

HONIG: Yes.

BOLDUAN: And I'm thinking, if the president is sitting there, and, I don't know, wants to weigh in and confer with his former personal attorney that is going to be -- he's -- he's not going to be able --

HONIG: No.

BOLDUAN: Is he going to be able to do anything? Because like --

HONIG: So, we know --

BOLDUAN: Envisioning how this looks.

HONIG: No, you're exactly right. The logistics matter here. We know, assuming Donald Trump actually goes, which would be a first in American history.

BOLDUAN: Right. Big if. HONIG: Really interesting if he does. We know that he's an active litigant. When he was on trial, he was always -- and you can do this. Like let's say you're the lawyer and I'm the client. We're sitting here at a table. I could be sliding you notes or --

BOLDUAN: For your sake I hope that never is the case.

HONIG: I would be in trouble. Whispering in your ear.

BOLDUAN: Right.

HONIG: It's very easy. In the Supreme Court, the person who's arguing is almost literally on an island.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

HONIG: They're at a podium. They're not within earshot or reach of the client. You're getting peppered with questions from all nine justices. The lawyer can't say, hang on a second, Justice Sotomayor, let me just run over here. What did you say?

BOLDUAN: Totally.

HONIG: I mean that just won't work.

So, Trump's presence will be a big deal, but he's not going to have any ability to influence the actual flow of the argument.

BOLDUAN: Quite a thing. It always is a thing. I mean it's always historic when the Supreme Court --

HONIG: I'd hire you anytime.

BOLDUAN: Thank you. Maybe I -- I question your sanity now. You can no longer listen to anything Elie says.

HONIG: Credibility gone.

BOLDUAN: Sara.

SIDNER: I think she'd be great on cross-examination.

HONIG: Seriously.

SIDNER: She would take you down.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

SIDNER: OK.

BOLDUAN: But would it be based with a -- with any legal facts? Absolutely not.

SIDNER: Who cares. (INAUDIBLE). It would sound good. It would make for some great quotes.

HONIG: That's all the jury cares about.

BOLDUAN: That's all the jury cares --

SIDNER: All right, thank you guys.

This morning it's go time for the moon mission. We are just hours away from NASA sending a crew to the moon for the first time since the 1970s. Moments ago, the launch team started to fill up the rocket with fuel. Four astronauts are set to fly around the moon and back and could set the record for farthest any human has ever traveled from earth. After launch they will accelerate to space from zero to 500 miles per hour in just two seconds. A few hours later, the Orion capsule will separate from the rocket, giving the crew a chance to pilot this spacecraft manually as they head for the dark side of the moon.

Joining me now is retired NASA astronaut and former International Space Station commander, Colonel Terry Virts.

Thank you so much for being here.

I just want to ask you what it is like when you explode off of that platform. What does it feel like and how hard is it on your body? Because you train and train and train for this.

[09:15:02]

COL. TERRY VIRTS, RETIRED NASA ASTRONAUT, FORMER INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION COMMANDER: Well, my first flight was on the space shuttle. And the main engines light up about six seconds before you actually lift off. Because once those big white, solid rocket motors light up, you're going somewhere. They want to make sure the main engines are working. And I remember sitting there. And when I heard that sound, my eyes got really big and I thought, man, I've been a test pilot and fighter pilot for a decade. I've never heard anything like that. And sure enough, when the shuttle jumped off the launch pad, and it'll be very similar in the -- in the SLS rocket because it's the same engines, you're smashed back immediately. It's like being, you know, in a Ford Mustang or a Tesla or something slamming on the gas pedals. A lot of vibrations. Solid rocket fuels has a lot of vibrations. So, it's like a couple of your best friends laying on top of you while one of them shakes you as hard as he can. And it's quite a ride. It's unlike anything I've ever done, that's for sure.

SIDNER: I'm not sure I could handle those kind of g-forces. I got to be honest with you. I am jealous, though. I would love to go.

Can you give us some sense about this particular mission? What is so significant to you about this mission, and what it means for NASA in the future, for space travel in the future?

VIRTS: Well, it's good. You know, 20 years ago, when the space shuttle Columbia accident happened, President George W. Bush said it, we've been in low-earth orbit for decades. It's time to go back to the moon. And so, we started this program that is going to, in some sense, culminate tomorrow, where we're finally sending people back to the moon because flying in low earth orbit was amazing. I love my -- the privilege of building the International Space Station and commanding it. But, really, humans are about exploring, and we need to go to the moon and then hopefully beyond that.

So, this is really a very big first step. There -- the astronauts are not actually going to land on the moon. They're going to do a flyby around the moon. Similar to the Apollo Eight mission, for those Apollo fans out there. But it's really -- the significance of this is it's the first step, hopefully, for much greater things in the coming years.

SIDNER: I mean, you know, we're talking about going back to the moon after this would be the next step. And then building something on the moon. And then the next step, one day being Mars, which seems crazy. It's like something we used to think about as children. You know, the -- Mars and martians and this whole thing. Do you see this as a real possibility? Because the timeline is pretty short for getting back on the moon.

VIRTS: They want to land by 2028. They're trying to do it during this president's administration. So, that's -- you know, we'll see what happens. I certainly wish them the best.

The big issue is going to be which moon lander that they pick. The new NASA administrator, Jared Isaacman, has been very clear about shaking things up, which is great. I actually was at the White House in 2018 at the National Space Council, saying, we need to shake things up. So, I'm glad to see that we're finally kind of changing paths. And we really need to focus on getting the right lander because you can't land on the moon without that. And some of our plans have been, I think, too big and complicated. And if we can get that simpler, then we could land there in a few years. If not, it's going to take a lot longer. So, I think the key is getting that lander plan correct.

SIDNER: Colonel Terry Virts, thank you so much for kind of explaining that all to us. And I just have one quick last question, am I too old to go to space camp? Is there still a possibility for me to at least just go to space camp? I'm not asking to be an astronaut.

VIRTS: You could go to space camp. I tell you what, you could go to space if -- you need to start a hedge fund, raise some money, and they have space tourist tickets you can buy now. But space camp is awesome. The NASA space camp in Huntsville, Alabama, is pretty cool too.

SIDNER: Thank you so much, Colonel. You've brought hope back to my life.

If you have any questions about this historic launch, you can head over to askartemis@cnn.com, submit your questions, and we're going to answer them -- not me, obviously, because I don't have the expertise -- during CNN's All-Access coverage of the Artemis II mission. Tune in at cnn.com/watch.

John.

BERMAN: Yes, William Shatner, he went up to space on one of those things, and I think he's a little older than us. John Glenn did a shuttle mission when he was a little older than us.

SIDNER: That's true. But, like, space camp, I'm sure I'd be around other kids. But, you know what, I'll do it. I have no shame.

BERMAN: Yes. No, we could be buddy (INAUDIBLE) when we go swimming at space camp.

SIDNER: OK, sounds good.

BERMAN: All right, dramatic testimony in the case of a husband accused of trying to murder his wife on a birthday hike. What his son said when he took the stand.

Attorneys for accused CEO killer Luigi Mangione head to court today in a bid to push back his trial date.

And the price of gas jumped five cents overnight, the largest single- day move in more than two weeks.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:23:36]

SIDNER: All right, giving you a live look at pictures of the White House, where any minute we're expecting President Trump to leave and head for an historic visit to the Supreme Court to listen to arguments there on the birthright citizenship case. We are keeping a close eye on this and we'll bring you any news when it happens.

All right, stunning testimony in the trial of a doctor in Hawaii accused of trying to kill his wife by pushing her off a cliff and then hitting her with a rock. The defendant's son took the stand yesterday, revealing details of a Facetime call with his dad shortly after the attack. Now his father has maintained his innocence, saying it was self-defense.

CNN correspondent Jean Casarez is joining us now with the details on this as the trial just, I think, resumed today.

You have this testimony from the son in the middle of all this. What did he say he learned from his dad when he called him?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Oh, he had a lot to say. Think about this. Son testifying against his father. Father facing attempted second-degree murder charges. Life in prison is the potential here.

Well, it was March 24, 2025, a year ago. And Emile was living with his father and stepmother on Maui. They had gone to Oahu to celebrate Arielle's birthday. He gets a call late in the morning. It was Facetime, just like Sara just said, so he could see his father.

[09:25:03]

His father started to talk to him. Listen to what the testimony said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JOEL GARNER, DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: What did the defendant tell you during that call? As close to word for word as you can remember.

EMILE KONIG, DEFENDANT'S SON: That he would not be making it back to Maui and to take good care of the younger kids. And that he had -- that Ari, my stepmom, had been cheating on him and that he tried to kill her.

GARNER: Did the defendant tell you why he tried to kill Arielle?

KONIG: No.

GARNER: During this 10:42 a.m. call, did the defendant tell you anything about what he planned to do next?

KONIG: During that call, the next plan that he said was to jump off the cliff.

GARNER: During this first call at 10:42 a.m., did you ask the defendant any questions yourself?

KONIG: I -- yes. I asked what was on his shirt because it looked like I saw splatters of something on his shirt. And he said, oh, it's just her, meaning Ari's, blood.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: There was a second call from his father about an hour later. It was about noon. And at that point he'd testified that his father said, I'm at the end of my rope. I'm going to jump off the cliff. And he could see the cliff. And he said, no, don't do that. And he said, I've got to get out of here before the police get me. That's not good, because that's consciousness of guilt right there. But the prosecution rested. The defense case is set to begin. It's believed self-defense. It's an affirmative defense the defense has. We believe he may take the stand.

SIDNER: Wow. I mean it's really hard to see a child having to do this against his own father. But also talking his father out of, a, killing himself and, b, hearing him say, I tried to kill her. The emotional toll that must be taken on this child.

CASAREZ: Nineteen years old.

SIDNER: I can't. It -- this is really, really difficult stuff. And, Jean, I know you've been watching it all and will bring us all the details when you get them. Appreciate it.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: New numbers are in. CNN polling released this morning shows that President Trump's approval rating on the economy facing a new career low. We'll dig into the numbers for you.

And emergency responders with a new tool to battle fires.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)