Return to Transcripts main page
Isa Soares Tonight
U.S. Supreme Court Guts College Affirmative Action; Russian Generals' Whereabouts Unknown Since Wagner Rebellion; Clashes Break Out at March for French Teen Killed by Police; Uganda's Anti-LGBTQ+ Law is Terrorizing Community. Aired 2-3p ET
Aired June 29, 2023 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ISA SOARES, CNN HOST: A very warm welcome to the show, everyone, I'm Isa Soares. Tonight, the Supreme Court guts race-based admissions in
universities, effectively diluting what Americans know as affirmative action. Hear Michelle Obama's powerful reaction to that ruling.
Then confusion at the top of Russia's military command. People are asking why certain generals have not been seen. But the big question is, tonight,
how is Putin re-solidifying power? And then France on fire. Protests turned violent overnight as anger erupts over the police shooting of a 17-year-old
boy. We start tonight though with what one civil rights leader is calling a dark day in America.
The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling earlier, stating that colleges as well as universities, can no longer consider race in their
admissions process. These ruling overturns a process that has benefited racial minority students for decades. U.S. President Joe Biden spoke just
an hour ago, so condemning the court's action and reiterating that discrimination still exist in America. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Because the truth is, we all know it, discrimination still exist in America. Discrimination still exists
in America. Discrimination still exists in America. Today's decision does not change that. It's a simple fact. If a student has overcome -- had to
overcome adversity on their path to education, a college should recognize and value that.
Our nation's colleges and universities should be engines of expanding opportunity through upward mobility. But today, too often, that's not the
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Well, the plaintiffs of this case focused on Harvard and the University of North Carolina, claiming those two programs didn't use
measurable objectives. Their words. CNN's Supreme Court reporter Ariane de Vogue joins me now from Washington D.C. So Ariane, just explain for our
international viewers here, on what basis the ruling was overturned, and the impact, critically, that this will have.
ARIANE DE VOGUE, CNN SUPREME COURT REPORTER: Right, absolutely. As you said, the court today gutting the ability of colleges and universities to
be able to take race into consideration as a factor. This is a landmark opinion, and it effectively overturns decades of precedent that colleges
and universities and Americans in general have come to rely upon for years.
These programs benefited black and Hispanic students, and now the schools are going to have to go back to the drawing board.
The opinion was 6-3, and it broke down along ideological lines. Chief Justice John Roberts, he wrote the majority opinion, and here's how he
explained why he felt like these two programs violated the Equal Protection Clause. He said that "Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be
reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause.
Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner
involves racial stereotyping and lack meaningful and points." What he was trying to say in this opinion is that the student applying to the school
can no longer check the box, the schools can no longer take race into consideration that way.
Near the end of the opinion, he said, look, there'd be nothing wrong with a student talking about their life experience, maybe in their essays and
bringing up race. And that's where the liberal justices ceased. Justice Sonia Sotomayor writing for the three liberals, she said that accommodation
falls, well, short, of bringing diversity in schools.
She said the supposed recognition that universities can, in some situations, consider race in application essays is nothing but an attempt
to put lipstick on a pig.
SOARES: Wow --
DE VOGUE: She said the decision will have devastating impacts of this decision, cannot be overstated. Worth noting, we have two African Americans
on this bench, and they are on opposite sides of this issue. Clarence Thomas, who has long rallied against race conscious admissions, has long
argued for the court to overturn precedent.
He said, look, he's painfully aware of the socio-economic problems of his race, but he said everybody is equal under the Equal Protection Clause, and
that's why he thinks that precedent should have been overturned. But Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, her first term on the bench, she saw this
from a completely different lens.
She said, "the court's own missteps are both eternally memorialized and excruciatingly plain." It's worth remembering, the schools here continue to
argue, they said, look, we want diversity. Schools are a pipeline to society. And we think that this makes a better academic environment. And
they had always warned that this decision would impact other places, like medical institutions, scientific research and corporate America.
But the other side said, you cannot take race into consideration, that amounts to racial discrimination --
SOARES: Yes --
DE VOGUE: And violates their goal of a color-blind society.
SOARES: And Ariane, we have heard now from many people commenting, I could see on Twitter, very strong opinions. Michelle Obama has shared her
thoughts on this decision by SCOTUS. She said here, "I'm going to try and read out part of her -- or what she says. Back in college, she says, "I was
one of the few black students on my campus, and I was proud of getting such a respected school.
I knew I had worked hard for it, but still, I sometimes wondered if people thought I got there because of affirmative action. It was a shadow that
students like me couldn't shake, whether those doubts came from the outside or inside our own minds." And in the second paragraph, you can read that,
but the fact is, she says, "I belonged.
And semester after semester, decade after decade, for more than half a century, countless students like me showed they belonged, too. It wasn't
just the kids of color who benefited, either. Every student who had a perspective they might not have encountered, who had an assumption
challenged, who had their minds and their hearts opened gained a lot as well.
It wasn't perfect. But there is no doubt that it helped offer new ladders of opportunity to those who, throughout our history", she went on to say,
"have too often been denied a chance to show how fast they can climb." Just a few paragraphs of her statement that you can read on Twitter. Just give
us a sense then, Ariane, of some of the reaction that we've been getting from both sides of the political aisle here.
DE VOGUE: Right, well, on the -- on the winning side, this has been their long-held goal. Conservatives, the group that brought this challenge has
been working literally for years, had brought other cases, they wanted the court to overturn precedent here. Today, they got what they wanted, and
they got what they wanted because the court's composition has changed.
President Trump put these justices on, and that's how they got this victory. The other side said this will be devastating. Some of the reasons
that Michelle Obama pointed out, and she's interesting there, because she sort of weaves together between what Clarence Thomas said, and what Justice
It was uncomfortable, she felt like in the beginning. But she noted that the plans here weren't just for the students who were checking that box, it
was for the school as a whole. And as she pushed it, and as they argued repeatedly, it was for society as a whole.
One interesting point here is that Chief Justice John Roberts, he said in a footnote, look, I don't think that this applies to military academies. It
seems like he's trying to carve out the military, but the problem with that is, the dissent pointed out is, why should that be different? Diversity is
SOARES: Yes --
DE VOGUE: So, landmark opinion.
SOARES: Very interesting. We should see where -- you know, what the reaction of this landmark decision is. Ariane de Vogue, really appreciate
it, thank you very much.
DE VOGUE: Thank you --
SOARES: We'll of course stay on top of this court ruling for you. Now, Vladimir Putin appeared in public again today, projecting an image of
normalcy as well as unity. But speculation is swirling over what's happening behind the scenes after the biggest crisis to shake the Kremlin
in decades. A number of top Russian military commanders haven't been seen since the short-lived rebellion by a mercenary army, if you remember, last
One of them is the man on your screen, General Sergey Surovikin, shown here in a video from Saturday, when he urged Yevgeny Prigozhin to halt his
advance. The "New York Times" reports Surovikin had advanced knowledge of the mutiny plans. The Kremlin won't comment on his whereabouts. CNN's Nick
Paton Walsh is following the story tonight for us from Kyiv.
And Nick, I mean, there's a lot clearly, we still don't know, there's a lot of fog. But why is General Surovikin central perhaps to what occurred? What
are you gleaming from what he knew, and perhaps, where he is?
NICK PATON WALSH, CNN INTERNATIONAL SECURITY EDITOR: Yes, I mean, we don't know what he knew. We know, of course, that the "New York Times" had
reported that he may have had prior knowledge, and I spoke to a European Intelligence official who said there were parts of the Russian military
establishment who might have had some kind of prior knowledge.
So, this doesn't necessarily mean they were Surovikin himself. But he's one of the military top brass, who Yevgeny Prigozhin, the Wagner rebellion
leader spoke kindly of. The only one, frankly. And so, when he appeared on Friday in that video you've shown, with what appeared to be a firearm under
his right hand, he looked relatively uncomfortable, a bit stressed, not his natural demeanor when he delivered the message, telling people to stand
down and hold their advance on Moscow.
Now, his whereabouts since then are unknown. He did not appear in public. That is not something abnormal, I should point out, that the Russian Chief
of Staff, Valery Gerasimov, who is running the Ukraine campaign, he's also not appeared in public since then. And there's less discussion about
whether he might have been detained or interrogated as well.
But Surovikin potentially now a focus of investigations, we simply do not know the reason for his absence. While at the same time, there are multiple
media reports suggesting he has been detained. There are also some who have stepped forward from the Moscow elite, suggest that he's fine, and in fact,
just carrying on business as normal.
The issue really, though, is whatever the truth, the suspicion will now hang over sort of akin, and that will begin to reflect the suspicions and
lack of trust across the Moscow elite and the Russian top brass. There's obviously going to be -- as a former MP Sergei Markov, an astute observer
of the Moscow scene suggested, a lot of investigation is to work out who in the military knew what in advance, who adequately responded, why was there
not a larger military response on the M4 highway from Rostov up to Moscow slowing down the Wagner advance?
It was essentially, helicopters and aircrafts that appeared to try and intervene in a little sign of land forces at all. And this comes at the
worst possible time, frankly, for Vladimir Putin, not only has he shown to be weak and lacking in a firm grip on the country over the weekend, he's
now going to have to deal with trying to work out who in his insiders in the security establishment can still be trusted?
Who didn't respond fast enough? And that climate of suspicion and finger- pointing is going to really mire his response to any changes on the battlefield here in Ukraine. They've been performing catastrophically so
far already, and on top of that, divisiveness, finger-pointing, blame games, possible arrest even, within the Russian top brass. That's a
particularly dangerous cocktail for failure. Isa?
SOARES: Yes, and any sort of purges and acknowledgment really of his own weakness. Nick Paton Walsh there for us in Kyiv, appreciate it, Nick, thank
you very much. Well, let's talk more now about the fallout still unfolding from the mutiny in Russia. We're joined now by Margus Tsahkna; Estonia's
Foreign Minister. Minister, thank you very much for joining us.
I want to pick up really where our correspondent Nick Paton Walsh you heard there, just left off in terms of the insurrection that we saw at the
weekend. Do you believe that what we saw playing out, that President Putin is losing power, is it a blow to his authority in your opinion?
MARGUS TSAHKNA, FOREIGN MINISTER, ESTONIA: You know, we have been living as Estonians here on the border of Russia about -- like centuries. And nothing
good is coming from the east, but we can assure you that. But the cases that the power struggle, what is going on now in Russia, we have to observe
it carefully, but we have to focus on the reason of that.
Putin decided to start aggression against Ukraine, and having a full-scale war, genocide, deportation of children. And I'm very happy that all our
allies, we have decided to continuously and even more support Ukraine to win the war. And all the consequence is what's going to happen inside
Russia. It is internal matter for Russia anyways. So let's observe it, but let's continue with a very calm nerve to support Ukraine.
SOARES: As you observe what is happening inside Russia, would you say that President Putin is weaker following the incidents over the weekend, the
mutiny that we saw?
TSAHKNA: We don't know exactly what is going on. But my personal opinion is that we're seeing the top of the iceberg from Russia. And let's see what is
going to happen within the next couple of weeks. But what can I say? Is that if the leader of the nation as President Putin is, he's saying
publicly that I am not weak, that I'm sure we have to have questions, whether he is weak or not.
But that is not our main conclusion(ph) to reach. The case --
SOARES: Yes --
TSAHKNA: When you have to -- what was on the main matter. It is aggression against Ukraine. And actually, Ukrainians are not fighting only for their
lives and freedom, but also for us. So we are very cool to focus on what we are focused on anyways. So support Ukraine.
SOARES: Let's focus, then, on that foreign minister. Given the instability and the cracks, then, inside Russia's top brass, how can Ukraine exploit
this instability on the frontlines? How can its allies help Ukraine make gains on the frontlines?
TSAHKNA: Ukraine is doing great development. And I think that, it was at first, Putin had an idea, and to have like three days ongoing, a special
exercise, but now, we have already -- fighting back more than a year. So what we have to do is constantly support by military and also politically
ways -- but also we're having the Vilnius Summit coming, the NATO Vilnius Summit up in two weeks.
So we have to understand that we deal now with a world which will happen after the war. So Ukraine must become a member of NATO. And also, we have
to deal with accountability questions. No one as well Putin, should enjoy their immunity from aggression crimes. So we should understand that we are
not focusing on hitting any prize peace, but actually, we have to win the war and also establish a new order, a new security architecture for
SOARES: What is Estonia's position on the question of Ukraine joining NATO? Should it join as soon as possible or you are of the opinion it should
wait, post war?
TSAHKNA: We understand that there is a hot war situation going on. So Ukraine cannot be a full member. But what we're really looking for from
this NATO Summit is that NATO must give a very clear message for the path for Ukraine membership. What are the next steps? So everyone should
understand after this meeting that Ukraine will become a member of NATO. There is a process for that. And this message is important as well for
Putin, to understand that --
SOARES: Yes --
TSAHKNA: This time, it's over when we have gray zones in Europe. The most dangerous place for neighboring countries for -- Russia is actually to stay
in the waiting room of NATO. We have to finish that, and ask Ukraine become a full member of NATO.
SOARES: Understood. And while Ukraine, of course, as you've seen, foreign minister, continues to feel Russia's brutality, as we saw with that
horrific attack in Kramatorsk, you have now President Lukashenko reportedly -- Prigozhin in exile, tactical nuclear weapons and potentially a mercenary
force in Belarus. Is Estonia worried about this? Does this concern you?
TSAHKNA: No, we are not worried. We would have been worried already like years and decades. I think that we must stay calm, and we just have to
continue what we are doing all together. Because we have to work on not just Ukraine will win the war, and there will be the peace, but we have to
work on that, that Russia never has any kind of idea about a new aggression.
Again, so we have to push Russia back into Russian territory. We know from history that it is the best and the peaceful solution anyways. So let's
keep going and not be afraid, and I think that we will get the gold.
SOARES: Foreign Minister, really appreciate you taking the time to speak to us live for us there from Tallinn in Estonia, thank you, sir. And still to
TSAHKNA: Thank you --
SOARES: Tonight, France bracing for more violence after the death of a 17- year-old boy, shot by police during a traffic stop. We'll go to Paris live.
And then later this hour, a new law in Uganda places some of the world's harshest restrictions on the LGBTQ-plus community. We'll introduce you to
those bravely speaking out. Both those stories after this short break. You are watching CNN.
SOARES: Well, in France, people are rallying for a third day over the fatal police shooting of a teenager. You are seeing his mother right there,
leading a tribute march a short while ago. The boy, identified by authorities only as Nael M. is reported to be of North African descent. The
shooting happened during a traffic stop on Tuesday in Nanterre, a working- class town on the outskirts of Paris.
French officials say the officer who shot and killed the 17-year-old acted, quote, "illegally". We're now learning that the officer has been put under
formal investigation for voluntary homicide. While protesters have set fire to several cars in Nanterre, French President Emmanuel Macron calling the
shooting unjustifiable, while also condemning the unrest. Our Paris correspondent Melissa Bell has more.
MELISSA BELL, CNN PARIS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): cars, town halls, schools, set on fire across France, as rage over the police shooting of 17-
year-old Nael continues into a second night. Enough to force the French president to call an emergency ministerial meeting.
EMMANUEL MACRON, PRESIDENT, FRANCE (through translator): The last hours have been marked by violent scenes against police stations, but also
schools and town halls, and basically against institutions and the republic. It's absolutely unjustifiable.
BELL: The deployment of some 2,000 police officers on Wednesday to the Paris suburbs, did little to quell the anger with 150 people detained.
"It's not the republic that was in custody, it was not the republic that killed this young man", pleaded the government's spokesman, Oliver Veran,
this morning. Another appeal in vain to calm the violence, as Veran describes some of the attacks on government institutions as organized,
In response, a massive deployment of police forces on Thursday, some 40,000 across France, including 5,000 in Paris.
But even before nightfall, a protest led by Nael's mother turned violent. Emotions still raw, even as the police officer accused of shooting the teen
was placed under formal investigation for voluntary homicide. Scuffles breaking out along the margins of the march, some 6,000 strong according to
local media. Anger on the streets of France remains all too palpable, with the family grieving, and a community looking for answers, as Paris suburbs
and much of the country prepare for another difficult night.
SOARES: CNN's Melissa Bell standing by in Paris, I'm going to pick up with what you left off there, Melissa, community looking for answers. I'm
expecting that they will come out to the streets once more. How are authorities preparing for this?
BELL: Well, there are those 40,000 policemen and women that are to be deployed, not just here on the outskirts of greater Paris, Isa, and those
neighborhoods, those communities so traditionally affected by these sorts of incidents and questions and tragedies. There is the deployment across
the country, but the fear is that just as we saw last night, anything that represented the state, whether it was schools, police stations, town halls,
they were targeted.
The expectation is that that will happen again tonight because of that deep-seated anger. At the fact that, here in France, for many years, Isa,
despite many of these tragedies over the years, allegations of police brutality and fears of the systemic racism that many believe fuel them or
allow them or certainly, have underpinned them, are not sufficiently investigated.
In fact, it is very difficult in this country to find even the words to do so since state institutions cannot speak of questions of race and ethnicity
in the -- in the tradition, in the respect, of the institutions of the republic. People are meant to be considered equal. What that means is that
any hint of differences that are to do with race or religion or ethnicity, are sort of drowned out.
And that's part of the frustration that you're seeing in those neighborhoods tonight. We saw it this afternoon, it's likely to continue
tonight, because that anger is something that they feel a great deal. And that they have a lot of trouble getting recognized by authorities. And it
has made traditionally very difficult for the police to address those --
SOARES: Yes --
BELL: Issues of racism within its ranks.
SOARES: We sure -- be keeping a close eye on what's happening on the streets of Paris. Thank you very much, Melissa Bell there for us. Well,
rights groups in France have been speaking out against police violence and systemic racism within law enforcement for years. I want to discuss
further. Mathieu Zagrodzki is an expert on security and police issues, as well as a political science researcher at the University of Versailles.
Mathieu, great to have you on the show. I mean, I want to get your thoughts --
MATHIEU ZAGRODZKI, ASSOCIATE RESEARCH FELLOW, CRIMINAL JUSTICE, UNIVERSITY OF VERSAILLES: Hello --
SOARES: If I could start off with this tragic incident, of course, that's fueled this anger that Melissa was talking about and this raid. It's fair,
I think it's fair to say that there's been a discrepancy from what the video of the traffic shots show, and the police initial statement. What are
your thoughts as you looked at that video?
ZAGRODZKI: Well, there is indeed a discrepancy between the initial statements of the police officers that said that the car was about to hit
them, and the reality, what the video shows. Well, what I thought -- well, obviously, it's not a self-defense case. It's not a self-defense case in
the sense that I don't think that the physical integrity or lives of the police officers were in danger when they -- when one of them decided to
fire one round from his pistol.
My belief is that the fans and, basically, this is the statements that the imprisoned police officer, that the one that is currently in custody made
is that the driving was -- of that young man, was extremely dangerous, and he was not supposed to be driving in the first place, because he is 17. In
France, you have to be 18 to have a driver's license.
And that he was posing a danger, a threat, to the surrounding -- potentially to surrounding people, to bystanders, to people who were
walking in the public space, which is why he used his firearm. And in France, since 2017, it is allowed to open fire on a vehicle, if that
vehicle is basically fleeing, is not compliant and posing a danger to -- a physical danger to people around.
SOARES: But you know, you laid down the defense, which looks incredibly flawed. I mean, it's not real reasons to be shooting someone just because
he's underage for driving. But you know, this is not, Mathieu -- and I think Melissa touched on this, this is not an isolated incident. Tuesday's
killing, I should say, was the third fatal shooting during traffic stops in France so far in 2023. Last year, there were a registered 13. I mean this
suggests, Mathieu, that something is wrong.
ZAGRODZKI: This is why, actually, I mentioned the 2017 law. The 2017 law caused a massive increase in those shootings. Before 2017, 2016, you had
basically 120 or 130 shots fired at vehicles in France.
In 2017, the law was passed in early 2017, that number increased to 202. And, indeed, we went from basically one or two people killed every year
during those incidents to above 10, which, of course, is much lower than it is in the United States, for instance.
But by French or even European standards, this is pretty high. If you compare with Germany, Germany has almost none every year.
SOARES: And the law clearly is a huge part of the problem, as you are stating there or one part of the problem. The other is, as I heard several
protesters on our air say today, they have been talking about institutional racism and profiling, racial profiling.
One man said, we are all -- Nahel is all of us, I think, was what he said.
Is the French police force institutionally racist?
ZAGRODZKI: OK, you're, right; this is part of a broader picture and something that started about four years ago. So basically, for the
international audience watching, you have to understand that French suburbs around big urban areas in France, you have big housing projects, very large
housing projects, where immigrants are located, mostly manual workers.
And for the past four years, yes, there have been major tensions between the police and the first, second and now third generation immigrants. And
when I'm saying immigrants, it's predominately from the former colonial areas of France, meaning, North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.
And yes, police stops are a very big problem in France, a very big bone of contention between those youth and the police. You said in your report or I
think it's your reporter on the ground, said there are no statistics in France about that. It's true, there are no official ones.
But us academics have the right to collect data about that and to conduct research. And depending on the research, depending on the area, you have
something like 8-10 times more -- sorry-- 10 times higher likelihood of being checked, to be stopped and searched, by the police if you are of Arab
or African origin.
SOARES: Very interesting. Unfortunately, no time for more. But I find this absolutely fascinating, what this means and what the law -- what Macron can
do, where the political appetite for this is. Mathieu Zagrodzki, thank you very much.
ZAGRODZKI: My pleasure, goodbye.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES (voice-over): Now protests at Iraq's Swedish embassy after a Quran burning in Stockholm, we'll wade through the latest fallout just ahead.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Welcome back, everyone.
Protesters tried to storm the Swedish embassy in Baghdad earlier, have a look at this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES (voice-over): Chanting on the perimeter of the building and on top of the roof. It's all in response to Swedish police allowing a
demonstrator, if you remember yesterday, we talked about this in Stockholm, to burn a Quran outside the city's central mosque on Wednesday, which was,
of course, the first day of Eid al-Adha.
Jomana Karadsheh joins me now for more.
And of course, this is one of the most holiest (sic) holidays in the Muslim calendar, Islamic calendar. We were talking about this yesterday and I
remember you telling me that they could have demonstrations.
What did you see today?
JOMANA KARADSHEH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I mean, no surprise that this is happening. You have so many Muslims around the world who are outraged and
angered by Sweden allowing this to happen once again.
So what we saw today, in Baghdad, this was in response to a call by the influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr -- he called on his supporters to
head to the Swedish embassy and to protest.
He also called on the government to expel the Swedish ambassador and to revoke the citizenship of the Iraqi refugee in Sweden who set the Quran
ablaze. Muqtada al-Sadr can really get the masses out --
KARADSHEH: -- so we are hearing they are planning another protest tomorrow. This was quite brief; it wasn't violent for the most part, from what we can
see. You can see they are angry.
The Swedish foreign ministry says their staff are safe; they wouldn't give more details. But tomorrow, there are calls for larger protests in Baghdad
and elsewhere in Iraq. We will have to wait and see if there are other protests.
It's a traditional day of protests and we have seen statement after statement coming out from different Muslim countries condemning this. But
not just this act, that they see as sacrilegious; they are outraged and furious with Sweden allowing this to happen.
They are saying this is not freedom of expression, as Sweden says. We know that officials in Sweden say that they don't agree with this, they don't
condone, it but this is their country. This is freedom of expression that is protected by the constitution.
Arab and Muslim states are saying, enough is enough. This is not freedom of speech; this is hate speech and Islamophobia and it must be stopped.
SOARES: Expect further fallout, I'm guessing. We will see tomorrow how that is reflected in the streets. Thanks very much, Jomana, appreciate it.
Now a dramatic legal reversal for the U.K.'s immigration plan for the court of appeal has overturned a lower court decision that would have allowed the
British government to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda.
Instead ruling that African countries not a safe third nation to do so. The government plans to appeal to the supreme court.
Now it's been exactly one month since Uganda passed some of the harshest anti LGBTQ laws in the world. The law criminalizes many aspects of LGBTQ
life, including sex education for the gay community and sexual relationships between consenting adults of the same gender.
Human rights groups in and outside Uganda have protests and many Western nations have condemned the legislation.
SOARES: In the weeks since, many gay, lesbian, trans and queer Ugandans are suffering physical as well as psychological harm from a law that really
codifies hatred though some people refused to stay silent. They are boldly speaking out for their right to exist and live freely in their country. Our
Larry Madowo shows us how.
LARRY MADOWO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Nash Raphael (ph) says he was assaulted on the night the Anti-Homosexuality Act became law in Uganda, after months of
publicity and hostility toward people like him.
How do you feel about the fact that you keep getting attacked.
NASH WASH RAPHAEL (PH), TRANS UGANDAN MAN: It is bad. It is bad. I wouldn't wish for anyone's daughter or son to go through what I'm going through
because I know how worst it is.
MADOWO: It was the second time this year that he suffered such a violent attack and the ninth since he transitioned.
He says his family disowned him and he got fired from his job for not wearing women's clothes. He is now homeless, jobless and penniless.
RAPHAEL (PH): I tried to take my own life, it hasn't worked.
MADOWO: How would you describe your life right now?
RAPHAEL (PH): It's hell.
MADOWO: The act outlaws gay marriage in Uganda, punishes same-sex acts with life imprisonment and death for what it calls aggravated homosexuality,
which includes sex with a minor or otherwise vulnerable person, having sex while HIV positive and incest.
It was widely condemned internationally before it even passed.
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: This bill is one of the most extreme anti LGBTQ+ laws in the world. No one should be attacked,
imprisoned or killed simply because of who they are or who they love.
MADOWO: The U.S. State Department advised Americans to reconsider travel to Uganda, due to anti LGBTQI+ legislation, warning that offenders could be
prosecuted and jailed for life or even sentenced to death.
An opposition MP introduced the bill that includes a 20-year jail term for what it calls promoting homosexuality.
ASUMAN BASALIRWA, UGANDAN LAWMAKER: I want to disagree with the people. Homosexuality is the worst kind of concept. No, it is not. We have lived
with homosexuality here in this country, in Africa.
What is reporting is that (INAUDIBLE) -- that was un-African.
MADOWO: You don't see any instances where this law will bring harm to the LGBTQ community in Uganda?
BASALIRWA: But how?
How, it is not there. This is another law -- it has no problem.
MADOWO: Uganda's LGBTQI+ community is worried the law accuses all of them of pedophilia, grooming or recruiting young people.
JOAN AMEK, CO-FOUNDER, RELLA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION. There is no where that any Queer person living in Uganda will feel safe. This is LGBTQ (INAUDIBLE).
MADOWO: Joan Amek's foundation considers this a safe space for queer women. But she has to find somewhere new to live.
AMEK: I have had myself been just away from where I am staying --
MADOWO: You have been evicted from your house?
AMEK: Yes. I have been evicted from my house.
MADOWO: For being a lesbian woman in Uganda.
AMEK: I have been evicted for being a queer person living in Uganda.
MADOWO: More than 80 percent of Ugandans identify as Christian and almost everyone else's Muslim. The Anti-Homosexuality Act is popular across the
religious and political divide.
The church of Uganda even defied the Archbishop of Canterbury to support the law. Ugandan Anglicans are now separating from the Church of England,
because of different positions on homosexuality.
REV. CANON JOHN AWOOD, ALL SAINTS' CATHEDRAL: This is a social problem, people learn it, so that is the stand of the church here. It is unbiblical,
it is a unnatural, it is -- against the order of God.
MADOWO: How come the church of Uganda and the Church of England are reading the same Bible differently on the matter of homosexuality?
AWOOD: Well people interpret the Bible differently.
MADOWO: Everyone we spoke to in the Ugandan LGBTQ community understood the risk they were taking on putting their faces out there. They could get
evicted from their homes, fired from their jobs, even attacked by the community.
But they did not want to go further underground, go in the shadows, they wanted to make sure that they made a statement that they are here and they
will not be silenced.
AMEK: Silence is equals to death. And regardless of whether I stay silent or not, they'll still kill us (ph). They will still criminalize it.
MADOWO: Larry Madowo, CNN, Kampala.
SOARES: Well, if you or someone you know are at risk of suicide, there is help out there and there is also hope. Here are some places you can turn
to. Befrienders Worldwide connect you to the nearest emotional support center for their part of the world.
And the International Association for Suicide Prevention also provides a global directory of resources and hotlines. Details are there, right there,
on your screen. And we will be back after this short break.
SOARES: Welcome back, everyone.
A 94 year-old artist in the U.S. is facing eviction from a beach shack he has called home for the past 77 years. Salvatore Del Deo has lived part-
time in his Cape Cod dune dwelling since 1946, an absolutely beautiful place.
But now he has received an eviction notice from the National Park Service. They say the land the shack sits on became federal property in the 1960s
and arrangements with the property's original owners have since expired.
Del Deo's son, Romolo, said the notice came as a huge shock and in error. He claims the original owner left the property in their will to his family
years ago. I want to bring in Romolo for more on this.
Thank you very much for speaking to us. I can see the back windows of your car. I've been told that law enforcement was there in the last 30 minutes.
What's the latest?
Has your dad been evicted?
ROMOLO DEL DEO, SALVATORE'S SON: Yes. We have been evicted from the shack. The shack has been boarded up by the rangers from the National Park
It's very unfortunate, because I've never been shown an order of eviction. I was therefore unable to do a legal action, to get a stay of eviction,
because I can't find a court upon which this eviction notice was served from. So there is no way to get a stay.
I am cooperating in as much as under protest but not to resist with what the rangers were tasked with doing by the National Park Service today. But
it is an improper procedure. We have a right to be here.
There is a controlling document that was signed by all parties with interests in these dune shacks, which are a community of artists, writers
and people very engaged with the nature that predates the Cape Cod National Seashore.
When President Kennedy created this park, he intended for it to remain a mixed use resource. That was the founding principle of this park. And it's
been something that's been ongoing for the 50 years the park has existed until today.
SOARES: And Romolo, from what I understand, the park's view is that your father has no legal right to this shack.
What do you say to that?
DEL DEO: Well, we certainly do have a very legal right to the shack by their own paperwork. It's the Use Agreement of 2012, which I was referring
to. This required the park to take very specific actions to ensure that the shack was always occupied by a capable caretaker.
And since we actually built this shack with our own hands, I think that qualifies us.
DEL DEO: And when the daughter of the originator of the shack died, first she left it to her next of kin, her sister, and also us, who have a mutual
ownership agreement on this property with her family.
And the park was required to issue annual, renewable leases. They failed to do so and then having failed to do that, turned around and used that
contrivance to claim grounds for eviction. However, I would point out to you that, again, there is no actual eviction notice. We are --
SOARES: So what are your options there?
DEL DEO: The senators from the state of Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey; the congress man from this district, William Keating; the state
senator; William (sic) Cyr and the representative, Sarah Peake, are all speaking directly to the National Park Service, to the Cape Cod National
Seashore and to the Secretary of the Department of the Interior about this situation.
Because I want to emphasize, it's not just our shack. We are just the tip of the spear. We are just the leading edge of the wedge. There are eight
other families who are facing eviction in a very short amount of time.
From what I can see, the National Park Service decided to target my father, because of his advanced age. And the presumption, I assume, that he would
be an easy target, easy to get rid of and that he would not have the ability to fight back.
They were badly mistaken. We have organized protests; I believe the petition is well over 13,000 signatures in one week and growing quickly.
This story is being discussed around the globe.
SOARES: Romolo, can I ask you -- how is your father?
He's just been evicted; he's 94 years of age, this shack has been his life for very much of it.
So how is he doing?
This must be a real emotional roller coaster. Explain to our viewers what this shack means to your father.
DEL DEO: My father first came into the shack when he was a teenager to help the woman who had built the original structure to maintain it. And he was
kind of like a handyman, assistant to her. And they formed a very strong friendship.
She was quite unusual. She spent most of her life rescuing seabirds here along the North Atlantic coast. That was one of her reasons for having the
shack. It was kind of like a hospital for birds, long before there were similar type institutions here. It was all voluntary.
Everyone in the local economy would chip in to gather the supplies she needed to rescue seabirds and nurse them back to health. And she and my
father became very good friends and he became the person who helped her maintain the shack.
And then when the original structure was completely failing, he approached the Cape Cod National Seashore and applied for permits and received them in
his name to build a new shack over the original shack.
SOARES: Wow. I really appreciate you taking the time to speak to us.
SOARES: Go ahead. Finish your thought, very briefly if you could, Romolo.
DEL DEO: No, I'm just circling back to the initial question about claims of ownership. They are not invented; they are documented.
SOARES: Understood. Romolo, we wish you the best of luck, do keep us posted.
DEL DEO: Thank you. Thank you very much.
SOARES: You're very welcome.
We'll be back after this short break.
SOARES: The next story is not for the faint hearted. Adrenaline junkies now have the chance to climb Europe's highest sea cliff in the west of Norway.
The route takes tourists up more than 800 meters above the famous Norwegian fjords.
The man behind this route says, quote, "The adrenaline rush looking down between your climbing boots and seeing ships in the fjord passing by over
2,000 feet below you is unparalleled."
And that does it for tonight, thank you very much for your company, do stay right here. "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is next. I'll see you tomorrow.