Below is the transcript from an interview with Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, that was broadcast on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on March 23, 2025.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Let’s turn our attention to Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul, chair of the Homeland Security Committee, who is joining us this morning from Bowling Green, Kentucky. Good morning, Senator.
SEN. RAND PAUL: Good morning. Thank you for having me.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Given your position in Homeland Security, I want to pick up where we left off with National Security Adviser Waltz. There are serious legal concerns regarding the use of these authorities to deport detainees without offering them a court appearance. Furthermore, there are issues regarding the handling of individuals rejected by El Salvador, one for gender reasons and another because they aren’t even Venezuelan. Do any of these issues concern you, especially considering claims from their families that many aren’t gang members?
SEN. PAUL: There are significant legal issues here. The Bill of Rights is applicable to everyone in the United States, not just citizens. However, the Alien and Enemies Act indicates that individuals can face limited processes if the president deems them a foreign policy issue. Ultimately, this will be decided by the courts, which must choose whether to label an age-old law unconstitutional or to defer to Congress. Take the recent TikTok ruling; while I disagree with it, the court chose to side with Congress on national security matters.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, and then the president issued an executive order that contradicted what Congress had established—
SEN. PAUL: Exactly. My concern is that the court should have upheld the First Amendment in the TikTok case instead of deferring entirely to Congress. If you were to guess how the Supreme Court might rule on the Alien and Enemies Act, I believe they’ll likely uphold it. While I don’t agree with that, it’s certainly a debatable issue. It’s not fair for Democrats to claim there’s complete constitutional chaos; there’s legal authority based on a law that has existed for over 200 years.
MARGARET BRENNAN: However, we aren’t discussing partisan politics; we’re focused on the courts. The judge has raised questions about actions that seem to have occurred under the radar, suggesting the administration might prefer to escalate this to the Supreme Court. Do you agree with bypassing the assurances provided in the Bill of Rights regarding court appearances and verification of these individuals’ alleged gang affiliations?
SEN. PAUL: We have a contradiction. The Constitution guarantees due process rights to all individuals in the U.S., but there’s also a law that’s been in place for 200 years saying the president can deport individuals at will. These conflicting laws will need resolution. Regarding whether a district judge can issue a ruling that impacts the entire nation, I suspect the Supreme Court will restrict district judges from having such broad authority as this matter progresses. However, these are major legal questions, and resolution begins with legal challenges.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
SEN. PAUL: If the president doesn’t challenge these issues, they won’t have standing and won’t reach the courts. The president generates these matters, but that’s the path to obtaining a final court decision.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It sounds complex—indeed, these debates are typically reserved for law professors. Meanwhile, there are individuals who may be wrongly sent to facilities outside U.S. jurisdiction. Are you at ease with what’s currently happening in your oversight capacity as committee chair?
SEN. PAUL: I think the courts will conclude that some type of process is necessary. I don’t believe individuals can be deported—
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you’re comfortable with it?
SEN. PAUL: I think that’s a bit presumptive. I believe the courts will afford representation before deportation in most instances. The real uncertainty lies with those under the Alien and Enemies Act, and I’m unsure if anyone truly knows that. While I am passionate about constitutional law, I am not a constitutional lawyer.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood.
SEN. PAUL: I believe this matter will reach the Supreme Court, and there are arguments supporting both sides of this issue.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood. Now, regarding congressional matters, reports indicate that you have proposed to Elon Musk a plan to reclaim $500 billion in federal funding that Congress has already authorized. There was a past attempt in 2018, which failed. Do you believe that you can successfully accomplish this in a rescission package, and how much do you anticipate being able to retrieve?
SEN. PAUL: This raises yet another significant legal question. Can the president choose not to spend allocated funds, or must he return them for congressional approval via rescission? This will eventually go to the Supreme Court as well; the Trump administration seems to think it can simply halt spending. Additionally, can the president or Secretary Rubio pause spending? My assumption is they will likely win the ability to pause funds if it’s done within the current appropriation year. If not, I believe it could be seen as impoundment. So, adhering to existing law is crucial, and that requires funding to be sent back to Congress for approval through a simple majority in a rescission process. I mentioned this to Elon Musk, and he appeared supportive. The challenge lies in getting Republican agreement, since no Democrats will volunteer to cut any spending.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you believe you can rally 51 Republicans for this effort?
SEN. PAUL: The president will need to effectively leverage his influence to persuade all Republicans to support this initiative. It’s not a guarantee that they will vote in favor. We previously attempted this during the first administration with a smaller amount of $15 billion, and we lost two Republican votes. My recommendation to the Trump administration is to proactively engage Republicans who might have reservations before any decisions are finalized, ensuring a pre-negotiated package.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Moving on to the Department of Education, it’s well-known that states primarily fund and oversee local schools. Notably, Kentucky ranks fourth in federal education funding per student. With over 900 Title One programs aimed at low-income schools relying on federal support, how will these schools access their funding if the president opts to close the Education Department?
SEN. PAUL: The pertinent question is why, with all this funding, our educational performance remains dismal. Over two-thirds of children struggle with reading proficiency, and a similar percentage lack math skills. This is a clear indication of failure—
MARGARET BRENNAN: Isn’t this a state responsibility?
SEN. PAUL: Let me finish. I would prefer to return control to the states. Historically, a prevalent Republican stance has been to empower states with school governance, effectively sending the funds back or ideally not collecting them at all. Nearly half of Kentucky’s budget is allocated to education, mirroring numerous states. I firmly believe we can govern our education system more effectively. Conversations with teachers reveal their dissatisfaction with national testing mandates, which they feel are unsuitable and consume valuable time. They desire increased autonomy, and I believe they should receive it.
MARGARET BRENNAN: However, the Kentucky budget reflects $2 billion in federal education funding. Can you assure that federal taxpayers will continue to contribute this amount to education funding? This appears vital for your state.
SEN. PAUL: What’s more essential to me is guaranteeing that children can read, write, and perform math. We’ve seen funding rise significantly while educational results have declined. Thus, expenditure correlates poorly with educational outcomes. My focus is on effective solutions, and I’ve proposed innovative methods to leverage exceptional teachers, offering them higher salaries. Imagine having the best teachers engage with millions simultaneously through online platforms, supplemented by local instructors reinforcing their lessons.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m sure we’ll revisit this topic in the future. Thank you for your time today, Senator Paul. We’ll be right back.
