Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Judge: Trump's Use Of 1798 Act Has "Frightening" Implications; Trump: Musk Was At The Pentagon To Talk About DOGE; Columbia University Agrees To Policy Changes After Trump Administration Funding Threats; Heathrow To Resume Some Flights After Power Station Fire; Democrats Fight For Control Of Wisconsin State Supreme Court. Aired 5- 6p ET

Aired March 21, 2025 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Come on.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She wins.

HUNT: Yes. Yes. She wins.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don't come after Mariah. But it's at least a lawsuit.

HUNT: And the judge did say that music experts could not prove enough similarity. We're not music experts at this table, Jake Tapper, but I think that the verdict is in.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Yes, I don't think so. That didn't sound anything like it at all.

HUNT: No, at all.

TAPPER: That's a great song, by the way. I think that's the last new Christmas song to real pop -- really pop, and it's maybe like 20, 30 years old.

HUNT: That is a longer conversation, Jake, which we won't have now because it's time for "The Lead."

TAPPER: OK, thanks, Kasie. We'll see you back in "The Arena" tomorrow.

A House Republican says she fears a slide towards authoritarianism, quote, "if we don't get the executive branch under control." Yes, a Republican said that. The Lead starts right now.

How far will a judge go in challenging the Trump Justice Department over these deportation flights? Did those planes take off and land in El Salvador against the judge's order? Who exactly was on the flights? How much is the Justice Department willing to reveal? A key hearing just wrapped. Plus, Elon Musk at the Pentagon. Why? The Defense secretary says he's there to talk DOGE or the Department of Government Efficiency, but the question is, what about the report in the "New York Times" and then the "Wall Street Journal" that Musk was there to sit in on a briefing about U.S. plans for a war with China?

Plus, flights once again landing at one of the world's busiest airports, Heathrow, in London, after a shutdown that caused a global ripple effect. The investigation launched into what went wrong.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.

Breaking news in our law and justice lead this afternoon, a federal judge warned of, quote, "frightening implications" as President Trump tries to enforce the nearly 230-year-old law and flirted with the bigger question, how much can courts check power of this particular executive branch?

Judge James Boasberg, whom Trump is calling rogue and says he wants to have impeached, came out swinging today, scolding the Trump administration's court filings as, quote, "intemperate and "disrespectful" and questioning the credibility of the Justice Department's lawyers. Boasberg, who was first appointed to the bench by George W. Bush, asked the Justice Department repeatedly to provide more information on the dozens of Venezuelan migrants deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador using the Alien Enemies Act last weekend, then grilled the Justice Department for answers on how two deportation flights were allowed to keep flying even after he seemed to suggest they should turn around. The Trump administration claims that the passengers were tied to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and saw the judge's order as non binding because it was a verbal order. Today Boasberg promised, quote, "I will get to the bottom of whether they violated my order, who ordered this and what the consequences will be."

Remember, the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 signed into law by President John Adams allows non-citizens to be deported without due process during times of war it has -- or invasion. It has only been invoked three times in U.S. History, all during major military conflicts, the Civil War, World War 1, World War II. Take a listen to the President's rationale.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think you have the authority, the power to round up people, deport them, and then you're under no obligation to a court to show the evidence again?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, that's what the law says and that's what our country needs. And so when you ask me if we have the authority, did Biden have the authority to allow millions of people to come into our country, many of these people hardened criminals at the top of the line.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Let's get right to CNN Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez.

Evan, just a reminder of viewers, as I said, Boasberg put on the bench initially by President George W. Bush, then promoted, I think by President Obama.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Correct.

TAPPER: He had choice words, the judge, for the Justice Department lawyers throughout this hearing.

PEREZ: Yes, Jake, I mean he began and he closed with the question of whether the Justice Department, whether the administration had essentially violated his order. You remember that there were two planes already in the air when the judge from the bench said that he wanted those planes turned around, those planes that were carrying members of the alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang. And what the judge was ordering was that those planes be turned back and those people be brought back to the United States while he considered whether this of this 1798 law was valid. There was another plane, by the way, that was still on the ground and took off after the judge issued an order.

And one of the things that's been happening, Jake, over the course of the last few days is the Justice Department has resisted providing even some of the basic information about who's on these planes, what authority they were using to deport these people to El Salvador. And -- but the majority of the hearing, this 90-minute hearing today was focused on the questions that you raised right at the top, these very important questions. And the judge called it frightening, really, and unprecedented what the president has done in invoking this 1798 law. And he also raised the question of whether, you know, any president or this president can basically say that anyone is invading the United States and use this to apply to anybody else in this country. And so, he did not rule in the end from the bench today, Jake.

[17:05:19]

TAPPER: Evan, now that these migrants are in this notorious prison in El Salvador, do they have any legal recourse? And tell us more about the conditions in the prison.

PEREZ: Right. Well, human rights critics of this prison, Jake, you're talking about 70, 80,000 people who are being housed here. And it is -- it is a harsh prison on purpose. The Salvadoran government has said that this is the reason why they're using this. It's because they want to curb gang violence in that country. And the United States, you know, these are conditions that, you know, probably normally would not be allowed here in this country.

And so that's one of the things that the judge hinted at, he said that the plaintiffs in this case are essentially accusing the government of being send -- of sending them to El Salvador to be tortured in those conditions. And, you know, I've talked to government officials in this country who say that there are credible allegations that as many as 30,000 of the people who are held in that prison either are innocent or the government of El Salvador doesn't have enough evidence to hold them there. So that's the conditions that we're talking about.

And again, what one of the things that came up at the hearing today, Jake, the Justice Department said that if those people want to challenge their being held there, they can file habeas petitions, which would be essentially individual hearings to challenge whether they should be held there at all.

TAPPER: I mean, how? I mean, they're in cells in El Salvador. Like, how do they file a habeas petition?

PEREZ: Right, exactly. That's the logistical part of this. And that's one of the things that the judge is going to have to address here.

By the way, we have more activity on this. We know that the government is appealing this. So we expect a hearing next week in the appeals court. And the judge, by the way, Jake, at the end said he wants to get to the bottom of whether his order was knowingly violated and who --

TAPPER: Yes.

PEREZ: -- who would face the consequences for that. So we expect that to happen in the next few days.

TAPPER: Evan Perez, thanks so much.

Our legal experts are here now. It seems, Laura, that this is without question going to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court. Just because the use of the 1790, '80 -- 1798 law, I'm not judging whether it's appropriate or not, but it's untested law.

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR & CHEF LEGAL ANALYST: That and also the fact that it's a single judge making a nationwide injunction over behavior over president of the United States. This thing that Judge Gorsuch wanted touch, that Justice Thomas wanted touch as well, this notion that a single judge can actually hamstring the president's actions in some way. That's part of the reason here.

But your question to Evan is exactly the right one in terms of how are they supposed to do it? How are they supposed to have legal recourse from where they are? They can't unring the bell, which is why the judge in a injunction hearing wants to be sure that the people who are leaving are the people who don't qualify for asylum or not in the proper methods of doing so or don't have some ability to prove that they in fact should be in the United States. And so if they don't have that, they don't get the type of due process.

Now, all this case, it could actually end benefiting and actually ruling in favor of Trump in the administration. All the judge here wanted to know was is there enough information and due process provided to ensure that the act that you're talking about applies here? That's what he wanted. The issue about whether the order was followed, that's the idea of kind of the cover-up in the crime. One is the action, the other is what you did about it.

TAPPER: Yes. I happen to be a little bit more focused on who these people are and how do we know that they all are dangerous gang members. Trust us, is not something I believe from any government, from any administration. It doesn't seem like a crazy question for the judge to ask. Can you tell me who these 261 people are?

TIM TRUSTY, FORMER CHIEF, JUSTICE DEPT. ORGANIZED CRIME AND GANG SECTION: I think that's about the only question, it's not a setup question. You know, look, there's a legal issue about this invasion, this wartime component --

TAPPER: Sure.

TRUSTY: -- of the Alien Enemies Act, I get that. But I think it's actually being teed up kind of consistent with Laura said. In a procedural way, that's almost the best case scenario for the administration because I think they'll probably be able to show that these people are in fact part of Tren de Aragua, which was a gang, never in the United States until we had open borders for four years. If they can show that, yes, these were the right guys to send. Well, yes, cry me a river about legal recourse in El Salvador because any deported gang member is basically outside of the U.S. Court system once that's happened.

So, the questions that the judge asked that I think are bothersome are these factual setup questions for contempt, you know, where he's saying, why didn't you obey my order, essentially, with these questions? That part comes off as imperious. That part kind of rings the bells of nationwide injunction issues. And if the case goes forward on appeal on grounds of contempt, in other words, appealing the contempt finding, I think the administration might find itself in a pretty good spot, saying, look, we're trying to get rid of people that invaded this country that are undeniably violent. And once we've done that, we've got one judge holding us to the fire, asking us factual questions with no time to respond, no time to assert privileges that might apply.

[17:10:18]

I think they may be in a pretty good place, even if they're thumbing their nose at the exact answer.

TAPPER: So, Laura, I'm going to come to you in one second. So Trump was asked today about reports that what happens if you deported any of the wrong people by mistake? Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I was told that they went through a very strong vetting process and that will also be continuing in El Salvador. This was a bad group and they were in bad areas, and they were with a lot of other people that were absolutely killers, murderers and people that were really bad with the worst records you've ever seen. And -- but we will continue that process. Absolutely. We don't want to make that kind of a mistake.

(END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: So I don't doubt that he was told that they went through a very strong vetting process. What I wonder about is what actually was the process? I mean --

COATES: Well, your honor, that's exactly the question they're asking. What was the process? And the idea of saying, take my word for it is not going to be enough. Why? Imagine if this was any other context and the judge says, well, prosecutors, what is your evidence?

Is there probable cause to even hold this person, let alone make an arrest? And they say, trust me, trust me, this is a bad person. It wouldn't fly if that were the case.

The government absolutely has a right to deport people who are not lawfully in this country. The question is not that. The question is whether or not the act that the president is using to justify the behavior and the due process that is warranted to those who need to have legal recourse to pretend or say that it's not the case, then that's what they have to have. They don't have that right now. The judge wants to know what the process is.

TAPPER: All right, Laura Coates and Jim Trusty, thanks to both of you.

Join Laura on her show, "Laura Coates Live." That's tonight and every weeknight at 11:00 p.m. Eastern only here on CNN.

CNN has been speaking to lawyers and family members of the Venezuelan men. We think it's just men, but we're not sure, swept up in the Trump administration's sudden mass deportation. Many are desperately searching for answers, the family members. They insist their clients or loved ones were not part of a gang. CNN's Priscilla Alvarez spoke to the family of a Venezuelan man who believes he was deported because of his tattoos.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Yurli (ph) has been searching for her brother. She is one of several Venezuelan families whose relatives have disappeared. They were subject to a sweeping wartime authority that allowed their swift removal from the United States. All accused of having ties to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Their tattoos appearing to factor into that determination.

She says he's not a criminal. Yurli's brother, Jhon arrived in the United States last October after securing an appointment to request asylum, where he was later detained. Yan is a tattoo artist with tattoos of his own, but she says he has no criminal record or ties to the gang. The Department of Homeland Security did not provide CNN the basis for his deportation despite multiple requests.

YURLIANA CHACIN, SISTER OF VENEZUELAN DEPORTED TO EL SALVADOR (through translator): He was asked at that time about the tattoos and if he was associated with the gang.

ALVAREZ (voice-over): While in detention, Jhon called his sister often, sometimes multiple times a day, to check in. ALVAREZ: Every morning, she says, she would sign on to this app, including in the evenings or whenever she got a notification, so that she could talk to her brother, who was in detention.

ALVAREZ (voice-over): In early March, he was moved to a facility in Texas. He had become more anxious, his sister says, and believed he might be deported to Venezuela. Then he vanished. On Sunday, Yurli learned planes had arrived in El Salvador carrying migrants and had a lingering suspicion he might be one of them. As videos and photos released by the Salvadoran emerged, Yurli spotted a photo on the news.

She felt confident it was her brother.

CHACIN: (FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

ALVAREZ: So she sent this photo to her family because she could see the arrow -- she put the arrow to send it to them and say, this could be our brother. She noticed his hair was cut.

ALVAREZ (voice-over): She needed confirmation. Then finally, a call with the Department of Homeland Security confirmed her worst nightmare. Her brother had been sent to a notorious mega prison in El Salvador.

ALVAREZ: I am with his sister. Where was he removed? (FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

ALVAREZ (voice-over): It was the answer she was desperately seeking, but also feared. El Salvador Center for Terrorism Confinement, known as CECOT, is the largest prison in the Americas and is infamous for its harsh conditions. Her brother, like other migrants, is now in Salvadoran custody, raising questions about what happens to them next.

Trump officials have maintained that those sent to CECOT were, quote, "carefully vetted," but also conceded that many of those removed did not have criminal records in the United States.

[17:15:00]

ALVAREZ: The United States has given you some opportunity, as you've described, but also it's the U.S. government that sent him to El Salvador.

CHACIN (through translator): I just think it's their laws. But you can't judge, imprison or jail an innocent person based on your laws. They had to investigate thoroughly.

ALVAREZ (voice-over): Yurli now has some answers, but also plenty of questions, among them, how and if she'll ever get her brother back.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ALVAREZ (on camera): Now, I've been speaking to multiple family members, Jake, and also immigration attorneys who were going to the hearing only to learn in their immigration hearings that the person that they had been representing had actually been deported to El Salvador, including one who was an asylum seeker, actually fleeing political persecution in Venezuela. So, these families and these attorneys are dumbfounded. They don't even know if they still represent them because they are not in the United States. That is the crux of the issue with so many people that I speak with.

It's not just that they were deported. In fact, Yurli said that her brother had come to terms that he might be deported to Venezuela is that they have been deported to another country. It is not their origin country. It is not the -- they are not in U.S. custody. They are in Salvadoran custody.

I've been talking to U.S. officials who tell me, yes, they're in El Salvador's custody. Now it's really going to be up to the Salvadoran president what he decides happens to them next. And that is what is so terrifying to all these families.

TAPPER: All right, Priscilla Alvarez, thanks so much. Really appreciate it.

One update, yesterday we told you about the French researcher who was blocked from entering the United States earlier this month because of what France's Minister of Higher Education alleged publicly were messages on this researcher's phone expressing, quote, "a personal opinion on the Trump administration's research policies." Now, before we brought you this story, we reached out to Customs and Border Protection and they refused to go into any detail about the case.

But after we did the story, the spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, Tricia McLaughlin, reached out to me and she was willing to give an actual explanation on the record. She says, quote, "The French researcher in question was in possession of confidential information on his electronic device from Los Alamos National Laboratory in violation of a non-disclosure agreement, something he admitted to taking without permission and attempted to conceal. Any claim that his removal was based on political beliefs as blatantly false," unquote. The Los Alamos National Lab, of course, is primarily focused on national security and the U.S. Nuclear stockpile.

Thanks so much to the Department of Homeland Security for that explanation and for a little bit of transparency and explanation. Transparency and explanation are your friends, Trump administration.

Coming up, what President Trump is saying about the meeting that had Elon Musk at the Pentagon today and reports about the billionaire there to sit in on a briefing about a potential war with China. Plus brand new numbers just in on the number of measles cases in the United States showing the outbreak getting worse. And just in, the announcement from Columbia University in New York City after President Trump revoked $400 million in federal funding over many things, including anti-Semitism during protests on campus. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:22:13]

TAPPER: In our politics lead today, the world's richest man, Elon Musk, visited the Pentagon and met with U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and top military advisors raising more questions about Musk's access to sensitive government information, especially considering all of the business ventures he has around the world, including in China. Earlier, the "New York Times" reported that Musk would be briefed on the U.S. military's top secret plans on how the United States would fight China in a war. I'm quite sure that China would like to know that. President Trump denied the report, saying on Truth Social, "Elon is not being briefed on anything China by the Department of War." That's all caps. That's why I'm screaming, because it's all caps.

Let's bring in CNN Anchor and chief White House Correspondent.

Kaitlan, first, OK, first, Department of War? Have we changed the name of the Department of Defense?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Not that I'm aware of, Jake. I don't think that the name has reverted back based on our latest reporting.

TAPPER: OK, it was the Department of War until 1947, but I just wanted to -- you know, the change in names all over the time. So let me ask you -- I want to ask you next, he, the president did acknowledge Musk's potential conflicts of interest through the billionaires contracts, all that business he has in China, for example. So why was Musk at the Pentagon?

COLLINS: Well, he was there obviously meeting with the Defense secretary. As you can see here he greeted him and escorted him out of the building. But what the President was denying this morning, Jake, was this report that he was going to get a high level briefing on potential plans of if a war with China broke out, what the United States options were and what that looked like. And the president was denying that specifically. And seeming to be caught off guard by the report, he said that he called two senior aides about it, his chief of staff and the Defense secretary, Pete Hegseth himself, to ask on whether or not that report that he saw was true.

But Jake, what stood out to me was not just the President denying that Elon Musk was getting that briefing at the Pentagon this morning, but denying that he would ever get a briefing like that. The President referenced his extensive business ties and his portfolio and also said this to reporters inside the Oval Office.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We don't want to have a potential war with China, but I can tell you if we did, we're very well equipped to handle it. But I don't want to show that to anybody. But certainly you wouldn't show it to a businessman who is helping us so much. You know, Elon has businesses in China and he would be susceptible perhaps to that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: That comment there, Jake, was notable, saying that Elon Musk could be susceptible to that. He also said later on that he did not think Mr. Musk would want to put himself in that position. An obvious reference to the extensive financial interest and contracts that Elon Musk has with the Pentagon. What we do know is that he was there this morning for over an hour, meeting with the Defense secretary in the Defense secretary's office. They later said that it was informal, that they were talking about his DOGE effort, which we know has been assigned to go through the Pentagon's spending, obviously the biggest in the federal government.

[17:25:08]

So it's a question of what that looks like at the end of the day, Jake. But then you saw Defense Secretary Hegseth walking Musk out of the Pentagon. And when he was asked what the two of them discussed, he asked the reporter why he would tell them that.

TAPPER: All right, Kaitlan Collins, thanks so much. And don't forget to look out for Kaitlan in just a few hours on her great show, "The Source with Kaitlan Collins" tonight at 9:00 Eastern only here on CNN.

Here now, CNN Pentagon Correspondent Oren Liebermann and Sabrina Singh, a former deputy Pentagon press secretary during the Biden administration.

Sabrina, can I just say this seems to me, and I don't know anything inside about this, but it seems like it was probably supposed to happen.

SABRINA SINGH, FORMER DEPUTY PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY, BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: Yes.

TAPPER: People in the Trump administration who didn't want it to happen told the "New York Times" reporters, told the Wall Street Journal reporters to blow it up. I mean, is that what it looks like to you?

SINGH: I think that's exactly what happened. I mean, it was clearly -- it was -- it was clearly a meeting that was going to happen and that he was likely going to be briefed on these o plans, these operational plans that the military puts together. And the fact that you had not just the "New York Times" but other, you know, journalists match that reporting. It was clearly something that people were concerned about, which is why it got out in the first place.

TAPPER: Yes. OK. So good job whoever the leakers were, you accomplished what you wanted.

So just last week, Oren, the government awarded Musk's company, SpaceX, a 733 million contract with U.S. Space Force. How much does the Pentagon rely on Elon Musk and his companies?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: The answer is a lot and that could grow. It's not only SpaceX from which his companies make billions from the Defense Department, it's Starlink as well. The military uses that. And that could very much grow, right? Golden dome.

Trump has made it clear that he is ready to spend a tremendous amount of money on that. Easy to see Musk pitching his company SpaceX and Starlink as critical parts of that. And frankly, it's easy to see Trump buying that argument and moving forward with somebody he knows so well. And it's not just the business links, DOGE has given him intimate access to the Pentagon as well as he -- as we see now the effect his layoffs and his efforts are having.

TAPPER: Sabrina, take a listen to the secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, he was asked about this meeting that was supposed to happen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: Elon Musk provides a lot of capabilities our government and our military rely on and I'm grateful for that. We welcomed him today to the Pentagon to talk about DOGE, to talk about efficiencies, to talk about innovations. It was a great informal conversation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Do you think they're going to be big defense cuts? Because that's what DOGE does, it cuts. And I don't think I need to tell you --

SINGH: Yes.

TAPPER: -- there are a lot of cuts could take place in the Defense Department.

SINGH: Well, I think -- I mean, Elon Musk DOGE has said that the Department of Defense is going to have to cut 8 percent. That is going to be really tight, especially when you are looking at different operational plans that are going to require a lot of capability. And Elon Musk, to what Oren was talking about, he has these billion dollar contracts with the government, SpaceX, Starlink provides huge capabilities that the Department of Defense relies on. But the problem here is that he has a conflict of interest. I mean, he has vested interests with the -- with China.

And now he's getting briefed, potentially even if it's not the classified plans he got briefed by, you know, it was reported Admiral Paparo, the commander of the Indo-Pacific. So when it comes to the cuts, maybe what Secretary Hegseth was doing was trying to show him look like we can't make all the cuts that you want. I can't get into the mind of the secretary, but it's going to be really hard to tighten the budget of the department when also Congress is asking the department to modernize and going to have to spend a lot of money on new capabilities.

TAPPER: So, Oren, the "Times" reports that Musk had been under review before all of this by the Pentagon's inspector general over whether he was complying with his top security -- top secret security clearance. Again, this is before -- any of this before Trump even fired the inspectors general. Does he have the appropriate security clearance for all this?

LIEBERMANN: Well, look, we've reported that he has a top secret security clearance. Now, whether he got that through the proper vetting channels or whether the Trump administration simply gave him that, that still appears to be an open question. But even a top secret security clearance doesn't allow you to know everything. There's a lot of information that's TSSCI, top secret, secure compartmented information that's effectively the need to know information. And something like a war plan would be need to know.

That's not simply shared with everyone who has a top secret clearance.

TAPPER: All right. Oren Liebermann and Sabrina Singh, thanks to both you. Appreciate it.

Breaking news out of New York City, where Columbia University is making some big changes after President Trump's Department of Education pulled $400 million in funding because of acts of anti- Semitism during protests on campus. We'll have the details next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:33:54]

TAPPER: Breaking news in our national lead. Embattled Columbia University has announced new policies after the Trump administration revoked $400 million in federal funding. This all stems from those anti-Israel demonstrations, many of which turned antisemitic. It disrupted campuses across the country and last spring, pretty ugly stuff in Columbia at times.

Columbia and other colleges facing federal investigations for allegations that they failed to protect Jewish students. Let's go to CNN's Polo Sandoval in New York. Polo, what are the changes that Columbia University is instituting?

POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jake, as you point out, Columbia University here in New York has been under some tremendous pressure and just the last few moments announcing this long list of policy changes, some of them including the review of admissions policies, the tightening of rules about the location of protests, prohibiting masks during the demonstrations.

They're also giving police their new arrest powers. They're also hoping to empower the university provost with more authority to determine disciplinary action against students involved in protests. The university calling this an improvement. That's the word that they're using.

[17:35:00]

And also the appointment of a senior, of a new senior vice provost that would potentially oversee various parts of curriculum, including certain Middle Eastern studies as well. And that will certainly be one to watch to see how some members of the student body receive that.

Obviously, as you point out, these changes coming, some could see these as concessions. These are coming after President Trump's announcement that $400 million in federal funding would be essentially taken away over those campus protest tests in the school currently on spring break. So certainly have to see exactly how this will be received by some

members of the student body, some that could see this as caving to Trump's request. But unless this also comes amid many Jewish members of the community there expressing concern about the wave of protests from last year. Jake.

TAPPER: All right, Polo Sandoval in New York, thanks so much. Switching to our world lead. Flights starting again at London's Heathrow International Airport. This after a nearby fire caused a power outage at the airport last night, bringing operations to a complete standstill and impacting more than 145,000 passengers. Let's bring in CNN's Max Foster who's at Heathrow. Max, give us a sense of the scale of the delays.

MAX FOSTER, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: So this isn't just Britain's busiest airport, it's Europe's busiest airport. It's a hub that feeds other hubs around the world. So this very quickly turned into a national crisis and a bit of a global crisis as well. Passengers literally stuck in the air being back, passengers on planes having to go back into the terminal and no one really knowing what's going on.

Because of the scale of this, a major piece of British infrastructure, the anti-terror police were brought in, but they very quickly said they didn't suspect foul play. It was simply a fire in an electricity plant that failed. These things happen. But then the backup system failed and the backup to the backup. So this is how the chief executive of Heathrow Airport explained it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THOMAS WOLDBYE, CEO, HEATHROW AIRPORT: I like to stress that this has been an incident of major severity. It's not a small fire. We have lost power equal to that of a mid-sized city. And our backup systems have been working as they should, but they are not sized to run the entire airport.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Which hasn't made many in the airline industry very happy tonight, Jake, because they feel the system just didn't work. Of course there should be a backup system if it doesn't work. There is no backup system. And they're the ones having to deal with very frustrated passengers. And the passengers can't get hold of the airlines because they're so inundated. It's a, it's a real mess.

TAPPER: Max, the airport also says they expect things will be back up and running by tomorrow. Is that a reasonable timeline, do you think?

FOSTER: You'll see the flights going off if everything goes to plan, but you've got a massive backlog and the big problem that all the planes aren't where they are meant to be. So these delays are going to go on for days and it's not clear really when it's going to end. And the fire service currently looking at what caused this fire, but people are just really frustrated this should happen. It's meant to be a national treasure and really didn't have the systems in place to operate normally in a situation like this. TAPPER: All right, Max Foster, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

Democrats in one crucial swing state are facing their first test since 2024 as election losses can they win back some of the voters who left the party for Trump last year?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:42:57]

TAPPER: This just in our politics lead, the New York Times is reporting that the Trump administration is firing nearly all of the Department of Homeland Security's civil rights branch. This includes three offices that handle investigations and complaints about the immigration system.

A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson tells the New York Times, quote, these offices have obstructed immigration enforcement by adding bureaucratic hurdles and undermining DHS's mission. Rather than supporting law enforcement efforts, they often function as internal adversaries that slow down operations, unquote.

Also in our politics, leads today as congressional Democrats in Washington try to figure out how to effectively take on Republicans in the Trump administration. Democrats in battleground Wisconsin are relying on some lessons learned from their loss in the 2024 election. And CNN's John King just got back from the Badger State where he visited for his all over the Map series.

He was checking back in with some key groups that are now focused on motivating voters for an upcoming crucial state Supreme Court race.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN KING, CNN Chief National Correspondent (voice-over): This is old school canvassing by black leaders organizing for communities in Milwaukee neighborhoods that gave Donald Trump more votes in 2024 than in 2020. Control of the Wisconsin State Supreme Court is the current battle.

ANGELA LANG, CEO, BLACK LEADERS ORGANIZING FOR COMMUNITIES: And that can decide things like fair maps, abortion, voting rights.

KING (voice-over): On paper, this election is Susan Crawford versus Brad Schimel. But BLOC CEO Angela Lang knows it's also a big gut check. Can Democrats and allies like Block energize voters who stayed home in November? Can they reconnect with once loyal Democrats who decided to give Trump and Republicans a chance?

LANG: People didn't feel that Democrats were addressing the needs and the issues of the average voter. And I think people wanted to try something different. And so I think this will be like the first true local test to see if there are lessons learned.

KING (voice-over): Local Democrats believe more organizing offices in black and Latino neighborhoods is part of the long term fix. In the short term, though. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Tell Elon Musk, take your money and get out of our state.

[17:45:00]

KING (voice-over): They hope a new villain helps improve turnout.

JOSH KLEMONS, WISCONSIN VOTER: Elon Musk is pouring so much money into this race, and Wisconsin has a real chance on April 1 to show that money cannot buy elections. The world's richest man cannot pick and choose who should serve in our government at every level, from state courts all the way up through governor, senator, and president.

KING (voice-over): Josh Klemons is a musician, a Democratic campaign consultant, and an avid TikToker.

KLEMONS: We got this, y'all. We got less than two weeks till Election Day. Everything is on the line.

KING (voice-over): Klemons says Democrats are losing close elections because they are losing the internet.

KLEMONS: Republicans have built a massive media infrastructure that allows them to get out their message in a way that Democrats cannot compete with. It doesn't matter if our messages are better or not, because they're not getting heard.

KING (voice-over): The Barbershop was a daily town hall long before new media and social media. Eric Jones is here once a week. He told us months before the November election that Trump was running stronger among black men.

KING: Are you getting things from the Democrats that you say, okay, this is smarter than they were last year. Do you see anything out there?

ERIC JONES, WISCONSIN VOTER: No. No, I don't.

KIGN (voice-over): To be fair, Jones says it's only been a few months. But with the court election days away, he worries again about all that Musk money.

JONES: Any political campaign is essentially an information war, and any war needs a budget, and the guy with the biggest budget tends to win.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Great piece. What are these Democrats in Wisconsin saying about how Democratic lawmakers here in Washington, D.C. handling Trump?

KING: Well, that's part of their problem, trying to turn out voters in this race, because when it comes to Chuck Schumer, for example, letting the Trump budget plan pass, other Democrats voting for it, they are despondent, they're deflated. Some of them are furious. So you're trying to turn out Democrats in a local race. They're still

sore. The bruises are still sore from November. And now they look at Washington and say, where's the fight? Why should I come out and vote for you, for the party, if you won't stand up and fight?

So as the party tries to learn the lessons of last year and put the pieces back together, how do we better organize? How do we use the Internet to turn people out? There's raw anger in the party at what's happening here. They don't think they're fighting back.

TAPPER: And their Democratic chairman, Ben Wickler, ran for chairman of the DNC, did not win. John King, thanks so much. The update we got from health officials today about a measles outbreak spreading now in three states and how these cases we've seen so far this year compared to past outbreaks. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:52:14]

TAPPER: In our health lead, 355 cases and counting in the ongoing measles outbreak in the United States currently across Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma. That's 34 new cases since the previous update on Tuesday. And it brings the total number of cases nationwide to 404, more than half of which are among children below the age of 18 for a disease that had been eliminated in the year 2000. CNN medical correspondent Meg Tirrell joins us. Meg, how far has this outbreak spread?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, as you said, this has spread from West Texas, where it's really centered, to two other states that we know of now, New Mexico and Oklahoma. And it's still growing really fast in Texas now up to 309 cases there. That's up by 30 just since Tuesday. Forty hospitalizations and one death in a school aged child.

In New Mexico, it's up to 42 cases with two hospitalizations and a death that's under investigation. And there are four cases in Oklahoma. And we get these updates, Jake, every Tuesday and Friday. And in West Texas, they are growing by between 20 and 40 cases every three days. We heard from Texas officials earlier this week. They expect this to be a very large outbreak and they said it could take a year to get through.

And just to provide some historical perspective, as you noted, we declared measles eliminated from this country in the year 2,000. And if you look back over the 25 years since then, there's really been only two years where we've seen more measles cases than we're seeing right now. That was in 2019 with the big outbreak we saw in New York with 1,300 cases. And then in 2014 when we saw that outbreak associated with Disneyland where cases started to approach 700. But Jake, we're over 400 now nationally just in the first three months of 2025.

TAPPER: Is this administration, the Trump administration, with Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. handling this measles outbreak any differently than previous administrations?

TIRRELL: Yes, they're even handling this measles outbreak differently than the previous Trump administration. You know that we looked at that graph showing that in 2019, that was the last really big measles year that we had in the United States. And then Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar under President Trump issued a statement when we hit a thousand cases saying, quote, the Department of Health and Human Services has been deeply engaged in promoting the safety and effectiveness of vaccines amid concerning signs that there are pockets of under vaccination around the country.

Of course, Jake, this contrasts with what we've been hearing from current Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. who has been misrepresenting the safety of the measles vaccine and emphasizing that it's a personal choice. He has gone a little bit farther than some expected in saying that they're encouraging vaccination, but many are worried about his messaging.

[17:55:03]

TAPPER: Yeah, indeed. Meg Tirrell, thanks so much. Coming up on the lead, ESPN host Stephen A. Smith will be here. Why he's calling out President Trump and the Trump administration on the matter of Jackie Robinson. But first, the scolding today from a judge pressing the Justice Department over its handling of deportation flights. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome to the lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, an incredibly tense court hearing today as a federal judge is trying to get answers from the Trump administration about those deportation flights. The judge promising he's going to get to the bottom of whether the White House directly violated his order. So what happens next?

[18:00:05]