Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Fire Near Heathrow Shuts Down One of World's Busiest Airports; Judge Holds Hearing on Deportation Flights; Lawmakers Face Frustrated Voters at Town Halls Nationwide; Judge Blocks DOGE from Sensitive Social Security Data. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired March 21, 2025 - 06:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:33:38]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), U.S. PRESIDENT: I also signed an executive order to dramatically increase production of critical minerals and rare earth's. It's a big thing in this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AUDIE CORNISH, CNN ANCHOR: President Trump tries to boost U.S. mineral production as he attempts to mine some from Ukraine.

Good morning, everyone. I'm Audie Cornish. Thank you for joining me here on CNN. I want to give you the news on what's happening right now.

Washington and Kyiv are expected to sign a deal on Ukraine's rare earth minerals that could be happening very shortly, President Trump telling reporters that Thursday. It's all part of the negotiations to end Russia's war on Ukraine. Those peace talks are expected to continue on Monday.

And Elon Musk going to the Pentagon today, the invitation coming straight from the Defense Secretary. The Pentagon says this is just a visit, but "The New York Times" reports that Musk will be briefed on the U.S. military's top-secret plan for any war which might break out in China. This is something that the White House, however, denies.

And the fire that shut down London's Heathrow Airport, one of the world's busiest, now under control. But the airport will be closed all day because that fire caused a power outage and affected its backup power supply. That's impacting flights around the world because Heathrow is a major hub.

And among those passengers affected by all of this, CNN's very own Richard Quest. He joins us now from Sao Paulo, where he was supposed to take off hours ago.

[06:35:05] Richard, you are in air traveler hell, basically. Tell me about the situation there for people like you trying to -- trying to be on the move?

RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR AT LARGE: Yeah, I was on my way from Santiago in Chile to London via Sao Paulo. And we got to Sao Paulo. I boarded the plane. We were on there for about four hours. It was the flight from Sao Paulo to London. The crew were great. But there's nothing you can do about it. We're all on our phones. We're looking. We can see what's happening in haze in West London.

And I think there's a sort of a quantum leap in one's mind that a fire thousands of miles away at an airport or near an airport has this tentacles and ripples effects around the world. And after four hours of sitting on the plane, drinking coffee, gossiping and chatting, they cancel the flight. And the basic rule when things go wrong on is when things go wrong, look after yourself. So I grabbed a cab and found a hotel where I'm going to hopefully stay.

Interestingly, thankfully, my plane is here. So when Heathrow opens up in a few hours' time, I think I'm going to be OK to get to London. The problem is for those people whose planes never even left Heathrow, because now they are in a rolling series of delays as planes arrive and other passengers take priority.

CORNISH: One other thing I want to say, we keep calling this a hub. It's almost more than a hub. I mean, the ripple effects of this, even if the fire is out, are tremendous.

QUEST: Yes. Heathrow, I mean, for decades, it was the world's busiest international airport. It's now still in the one of the top three. It's the busiest in Europe in terms of international traffic. It's a real crossroads. And if you look at the U.S. carriers, I mean, let's just take New York, London, for example, which is a billion-dollar route in its own right for British Airways.

There are anywhere between 24 to 28, 30 flights a day between New York and London. Los Angeles, half a dozen up to a dozen. The number of flights backwards and forwards between these major cities and between the U.K. and the U.S. is vast. And that's why it's going to take many days, because here's the awful part. If your flight never left London to bring you back, well, I'm afraid you're at the back of the queue because the next flight takes those passengers that were supposed to be on it. And the day after takes those passengers.

And what the airline now has to do, and this is the same for all airlines, is they have to start fitting people in. And I'm afraid if you're looking to get to London, you could be looking into early next week if you haven't got to, you know, if you're one of those people who have been badly affected. And that's -- that's unfortunate. But it's just the way it is. When travel goes wrong, it goes wrong spectacularly.

CORNISH: CNN's Richard Quest joining us from Brazil. Safe travels. Best of luck. We want to turn here to the politics of the U.S., because what if a judge ordered the Trump administration to do something, any kind of order, and they just refuse to comply? That appears to be where we could be headed as the White House continues to frustrate a judge who's demanding more information about last weekend's deportation flights.

President Trump calls for the has been calling for the impeachment of that judge and a Truth Social post. He calls the ruling ridiculous and inept.

All right, Elliot, we have talked about how you don't like to use the term constitutional crisis. I will join you in that because we're not at a crisis point yet.

However, people care about this because if you don't follow an order here, there may be something else down the road where you decide you don't want to follow an order. Am I getting that right? What is the legal concern?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You absolutely are. It's almost like remember Peewee's Playhouse from the 1980s?

(CROSSTALK)

CORNISH: We're really taking it back today. I mean, I heard so many 90s TV references. You guys get yours ready. You guys get yours ready.

WILLIAMS: But the magic word is constitutional crisis, and everybody screams when somebody says it.

CORNISH: But most people don't even really know what that means.

WILLIAMS: Nobody knows what it means. But the concept generally is when do the system -- when are the systems of government incapable of dealing with a problem that is presented by a branch of government? So the Civil War was a constitutional crisis where literally a portion of America broke off. And in effect, the country went into war.

South Carolina in the 1830s, nullifying federal government tariffs is another instance of that. Here, you have the president who's sort of constitutional crisis curious, if you want to say that, where suggesting that the government might defy court orders.

But it hasn't happened yet until we have a point at which something goes through the courts, the Supreme Court rules on it, and the government refuses to honor that. Then, yes, of course, we're in a crisis.

[06:40:09]

CORNISH: Yeah. Rob --

WILLIAMS: This is bad. And the rhetoric isn't great at all.

CORNISH: The rhetoric isn't great, which brings me to that. Is there such thing as a good ruling if it's against Trump?

ROB BLUEY, PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THE DAILY SIGNAL: Well, Karoline Leavitt spoke about this. And obviously, I think one of the things that the White House would like to see, we've talked about this in the past, is clarity on these nationwide injunctions or universal injunctions. And I think that's ultimately, Audie, where I hope we get clarity from the Supreme Court.

We've had a number of federal district judges. I think there have been, what, over 120 lawsuits or rulings issued against the Trump administration in one way or another.

CORNISH: Yeah.

BLUEY: And these are big questions that we need answers to.

CORNISH: Right. Although a lot of immigration attorneys say, look, there were legal ways to do some of this stuff, right? Like, just because you don't choose that path doesn't mean it has to be this way.

BLUEY: Sure. And I think what the -- you'll hear the administration say, and this is their defense in this particular case, is that this is a national security issue. And this judge is out of bounds trying to stop these flights from leaving. And by the way, the flights were already out of the United States. So, you know -- so in that particular case, he didn't have the authority to do so anyway.

WILLIAMS: The only thing I would say in response to that is that the war on terror, going another deep cut to the early 2000s, was in effect a question over the reach of national security and how far can the government go. And that was resolved in the courts. The courts decided what's too far and what's not.

MARGARET TALEV, SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR, AXIOS: But many administrations go jurisdiction shopping all the time. So you want to aim for a specific district or a circuit where a judge or the appeals court is going to give you the result you think that you're going to want, but then you don't want it when it doesn't serve your purposes. Part of the challenge is that there are so many ways in which this current administration is trying to push precedent, test precedent, test executive power all at once that you've got this court pile up in multiple jurisdictions around the country all at the same time.

And it's not just in the Venezuelan area. When it comes to Social Security and the latest standoff over Social Security, you've got a judge putting a hold on sharing data sensitive information that very likely is a privacy violation. And you've got the response from the administration so far being, if this -- if we have to abide by this ruling, it could shut down Social Security and it'll be the judge's fault. And so I don't think --

(CROSSTALK)

CORNISH: The judiciary is really struggled, right? Because they're trying to -- it's not their place. It's like --

TALEV: It's being tested.

CORNISH: -- get into big political fights.

TALEV: It is a purposeful test. And the way it's being done is purposeful to try to have this standoff.

BLUEY: Margaret, to your point, even the Biden administration in January asked the Supreme Court to take action on these nationwide injunctions. So I think it does extend regardless of political party.

CORNISH: OK, stay with us. No, no. This is an interesting conversation and we are going to bring some more voices into it.

Still ahead on CNN This Morning. Lawmakers out on recess, which sounds fun, but it's not because they're facing angry voters at town halls. We're going to have Congressman Pat Harrigan live from North Carolina with what he's hearing from his community.

Plus, all she wants for Christmas is a win. A judge now ruling on a lawsuit that accused Mariah Carey of stealing her holiday mega hit. More from the group chat after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:47:27]

CORNISH: With lawmakers out on recess, the arguments, which usually play out in the halls of Congress, are now spilling out into town halls nationwide. People are showing up angry and frustrated at events for lawmakers from both parties. Democrats facing blowback for not standing up to Republicans. Republicans hearing frustrations for things like Elon Musk's DOGE cuts.

Here's just a bit of what Wyoming Republican Representative Harriet Hageman heard from voters just last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm a retired military officer. I am still a Republican. You are a lawyer. Where is this fraud?

REP. HARRIET HAGEMAN (R-WY): This is the fraud. Spending is the fraud.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Who is Musk accountable to? What qualifies him to be making these cuts?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My husband is 100% disabled, and you're all sitting there trying to cut unemployable disability payments from him? That's ridiculous, and it's wrong.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Joining me now, Congressman Pat Harrigan of North Carolina is a former Army Green Beret and member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Congressman, thank you for joining us.

REP. PAT HARRIGAN (R-NC): Audie, thanks for having me this morning. I appreciate it.

CORNISH: I don't know if you were able to hear clearly some of the voters that were speaking there. They were asking some pretty valid questions, and I want to take the first one, the person who says, look, I'm a Republican. I'm also a veteran, and they're having a real problem with how this is being carried out. What's your response to that?

HARRIGAN: You know, look, very broadly, in November, the American people voted for change. They gave President Donald Trump a mandate to go in and clean out the inefficiencies in our government. That's one of the things that he committed to do on the campaign trail, and that is one of the commitments that he has followed through with in action since being sworn in on January 20th.

And so --

CORNISH: Do you think that that has fallen disproportionately on veterans just because they make up such a large portion of the federal workforce?

HARRIGAN: No, I certainly don't think that that's been the case, but I think as you look at the overall cuts that have happened, we've got to remember that only one half of one percent of the entire federal workforce has been affected by these cuts up until this point in time. And so when you look back at historical changes that have happened with our federal workforce, I'd point back to 1995 with President Clinton when he let 400,000 federal workers go to make things a little bit leaner, a little bit meaner. This has happened before. There's precedent for this, and, you know, everybody with their hair on fire right now, I think, should put that in perspective.

[06:50:06]

CORNISH: You're about to have a town hall. You're going to have it. I think it's virtual, right? It's not in person. This is not a judgment, but saying your hair is on fire, chill out, I don't feel like that works with voters. So kind of what's your plan to talk about this for people who really have serious questions?

HARRIGAN: Look, we've been very commutative with folks. The problem is and we just actually -- I'm sitting in our new district office. And just three weeks ago, we had an open house to dedicate the new district office.

And out of the couple hundred people that came, there was about 125 very agitated protesters that completely disrupted what was supposed to be a nonpartisan dedication of a, you know, new federal facility to serve their interests in Washington, D.C. And whether that be Social Security or Medicare, Medicaid issues, veterans issues, whether health care or educational things.

Look, during the prayer of dedication, they stood up and started cussing out the prayer. These things have become unbelievably chaotic. These folks, many of them are actually paid protesters. About half of the protesters we were able to track to outside of our district. They didn't even -- they're not even constituents of ours.

And so there -- we have a responsibility to create as small of a government as we possibly can in terms of our communicative nature with our constituents. That's something I really believe in. The more communication we have, the more trust that we have in our elected officials and our government. But the current circumstances are unproductive.

CORNISH: Congressman, I want to -- I appreciate what you're saying, although I recall Democrats going through the same thing with the Tea Party movement, also calling them astroturf, also saying that they were paid agitators and later finding out that they became part of a movement that really helped change the government.

Because you're on the House Armed Services Committee, I also want to ask you about this meeting today with the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, inviting Musk's DOGE team or inviting Elon Musk. First of all, we know that the cuts that they're making there and working out to point one percent of the total annual military budget. Do you think that makes a difference or do you think that actually committees like the one you're on should be looking and making these decisions?

HARRIGAN: Yeah, I think we've got some -- some institutional differences here, right? Just laying out the facts. We've got the HASC and SASC chairman that have a perspective that we need to significantly add to defense spending. And we've got the executive branch through President Trump and Secretary Hegseth that are laying out that we need to make some cuts into defense.

And look, I think, frankly, from being as honest as I possibly can be with the American people, leveraging my background as a special operator and someone who's also a businessman in the defense industrial base complex. Both are accurate, right? There is a lot of fraud, waste and abuse that exists within our contracting apparatus in existing contracts that service DoD.

The American taxpayers need a better deal there. They need their money to be spent more principally, not just, you know, look on its surface. We have not really won a conflict in our military since World War Two saved Desert Storm.

And so the equipment that we're using, the assets that we're using right now have not helped us to win the last 30 years of conflict. And I think what President Trump, Secretary Hegseth, Elon Musk are looking at is they're making sure that what -- what assets, what capabilities we're going to move forward with in re-envisioning defense are actually going to help us deter the next conflict, particularly the conflict against China. And I think --

(CROSSTALK)

CORNISH: Do you believe that Elon Musk should be a key part of that initiative, that moving forward? And I ask this because he already holds billions in contracts with the Defense Department.

HARRIGAN: I think that that's the president's prerogative, right? He has enlisted Elon Musk because he trusts him to go in and say, look, from just a business perspective, Elon Musk is one of the most successful businessmen in the history of humanity. And you trust him from a business perspective to go in and look at the P&L on the balance sheet effectively, right?

The budgets of our military, of our different government agencies and say, look, if I was running this as a private business, this this is totally duplicative. This is fraud, waste or abuse. This is not serving the American people with the intent that the executive branch has been given and the authority that they've been given through the election process.

And so, look, I think when it ultimately comes down to defense, we need to get a little bit leaner. We need to get a little bit meaner. We also simultaneously need to spend more money on new capabilities, right? We can have the military that we have today.

(CROSSTALK)

CORNISH: And there's the rush trying to do both at the same time I think.

All right. Congressman Pat Harrigan from North Carolina. I hope we can speak to you again maybe after those tone halls. Thank you for being on CNN This Morning.

[06:55:02]

HARRIGAN: Thanks for having me.

CORNISH: I also want to turn now to the federal courts. They've ordered the Social Security Administration to block attempts by members of DOGE to access your personal data. The judge calls the data grab at Social Security a phishing expedition. Some voters seem to agree.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DESIREA JIMENEZ, LAS VEGAS RESIDENT: I feel like we're going to lose Medicaid, Medicaid, questions about Social Security. You know, things that my family personally relies on. And it's just -- it's -- it's a lot. I feel like things are just going way, way backwards.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Margaret, I want to talk with you. We're just talking to the Congressman about Elon Musk and his connection with the Defense Department. Now people are looking at DOGE and his workers having access to Social Security information. What are the ongoing concerns about the access to this data? All of this data?

TALEV: Yeah, they're -- they're primarily in two buckets. And one is that personal privacy data that's attached to your number. You know, like people say, don't give out your Social Security number.

CORNISH: And then --

CORNISH: But now, like Random Engineer X maybe can --

TALEV: Get all of it. So there -- there is a concern on that front about your privacy. I would say many Americans assume their privacy is already gone, so that may not be their top concern.

CORNISH: OK, I'm not ready to give away the store, but yeah.

TALEV: And -- and or that it could be used to be tied to immigration enforcement. And that's not the reason why people are --

CORNISH: Are you hearing that in your group chat? I'm asking because he used to be at ICE.

WILLIAMS: It's not on the ICE group chat.

CORNISH: Yeah.

WILLIAMS: But you know, the most important thing, and it's critical that we make this distinction, it's not a broadside against DOGE, the judge's ruling. What the judge said is that the if the information were anonymized, DOGE could still have access to all of it.

And so it's merely just a way of safeguarding the information. They can do anything they want with respect to recommending that the size of the agency be shrunk. But it's just a question of the precise data.

And to your point, Margaret, absolutely. You know, people have an interest in making sure that their Social Security numbers are not given outside of those who absolutely need to know that.

CORNISH: I think we just saw -- hold on, Rob, how do you see this?

BLUEY: Well, I wish we were we were as concerned about China and other hostile actors from foreign countries, you know, accessing this data, which we know in the past they have great interest in doing. So I don't -- I don't think that anyone that people should be respectful of the privacy --

CORNISH: Yeah, but when data escapes, it makes its way to China, et cetera, through data brokers. I mean, isn't this why we're concerned once it's out, it's out.

BLUEY: Of course. Yeah, we should be concerned about that. I think Americans have a right to protect that information and obviously don't want to see it fall into enemy hands.

WILLIAMS: Can I have your Social Security number?

BLUEY: No, no, I can't.

WILLIAMS: That's the thing. But that's the thing. You know, I can know information about you, but there you have an interest in your Social Security number getting out. It's almost a false debate that we're having here. The simple fact is you do not need individuals. So actual Social Security numbers in order to figure this information.

TALEV: The other concern about Social Security that many Americans have is that they are not going to be able to count on the benefits that they have been paying towards and planning when they're like, what does my life look like when I get older and I'm retired or I can't work as much or, you know, et cetera.

So I think it's these dual concerns at the same time. One of them is technical. It's around why does DOGE need my Social Security number and are my privacy rights protected? And the second one is, are my benefits being protected? Can I count on getting them or is that going to get clipped in the process of the cuts?

CORNISH: Yeah, because also in the atmosphere, people are hearing about like cuts to these agencies, like cuts to the -- the Postal Department. Like, I think atmospherically, it's am I going to get the services I need to live my life?

BLUEY: Donald Trump has said, I think, since at least 2015, if not earlier, that he would not take away Social Security benefits. I mean, he has been crystal clear. This is, again, conservatives and others who want to make reforms to entitlement programs have differences of opinion.

CORNISH: Yeah, I think it's the word reforms also that gets people like, ugh, because of the details.

BLUEY: But if you go back, think about it. If this country had embarked upon the Social Security reforms back in the mid-2000s and the gains that we've seen in the stock market, think about it. Americans would be better off today as a result of that.

CORNISH: I love that leap. I love that for you. I also like that we moved from the 90s to the 2000s. By the end of this program, we will be in the 2025. We just have a minute left. Lightning round on what you are paying attention to, looking, keeping an eye on.

WILLIAMS: Pentagon spokesman demoted a day or so after the Jackie Robinson hubbub. It's the first public fissure within MAGA and within the leadership of the administration. Who's next? Will there be more?

CORNISH: Rob?

BLUEY: Yes. March Madness, of course. And they make the state pulling off the big upset.

CORNISH: Wait, does your bracket survive this?

BLUEY: I know.

CORNISH: Oh, OK. I was like, that's the real news. Man's bracket maintained.

[07:00:00] BLUEY: I'm not perfect. Yeah, Purdue. Big game against Purdue.

CORNISH: Margaret?

TALEV: You should have done basketball last. Mine is Social Security. I think this is going to be an animating issue, especially in the next few days, because we're seeing the reduction of some offices, the closure of some offices, at the same time that there are new rules to make it a little harder to verify details to get disability benefits. You put all that together, people are going to be missed.

CORNISH: A lot of people are going to be watching that. I want to thank you for watching us. I'm Audie Cornish. CNN News Central starts right now.