Rep. Turner says he doesn’t think ground troops necessary to reopen Strait of Hormuz
Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, appears on ABC News’ “This Week” on April 5, 2026. (ABC News)
(WASHINGTON) — Republican Rep. Mike Turner defended the U.S. war with Iran on Sunday and said that he doesn’t believe an American ground force would be required to restore freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
“I don’t think U.S. ground troops are going to be necessary in any direct conflict,” Turner told ABC News’ “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos after being pressed on whether troops on the ground would be needed to reopen the strait.
“The straits are going to be open,” Turner told Stephanopoulos, but said that the U.S. cannot allow Iran to continue developing missile technology or nuclear weapons that could threaten the American homeland and Europe.
“You have to be able to address this … great sponsor of terrorism, this … global power ambition that Iran has,” he said.
Turner’s comments come as President Donald Trump has repeatedly indicated that the Strait of Hormuz is not the U.S.’s problem.
“The United States imports almost no oil through the Hormuz Strait and won’t be taking any in the future. We don’t need it. We haven’t needed it and we don’t need it,” Trump said Wednesday in a prime-time address to the nation, adding that it was the responsibility of other countries to secure the strait.
“We will be helpful, but they should take the lead in protecting the oil that they so desperately depend on,” he said.
Turner said that despite the impact of the war on global oil markets, the consequences of inaction from the U.S. against Iran would have been greater.
“Certainly, you know, Iran is going to have some things that they’re going to be able to do during the conflict,” Turner said. “But if you don’t undertake the conflict, if you just step back and watch, as the Obama administration was going to do while Iran became a nuclear power and they became North Korea, we wouldn’t be looking at the Strait of Hormuz,” he added, claiming that if Iran had developed nuclear weapons the world would be “held hostage by a terrorist state.”
“They still are being significantly diminished,” Turner said, “and their ability to be able to be marching toward a nuclear state is being eliminated.”
The Department of Justice (DOJ) seal on the J. Edgar Hoover Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) building in Washington, DC, US, on Friday, Jan. 2, 2026. Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The FBI conducted a search of a Washington Post reporter’s home Wednesday morning in search of alleged classified information, according to the newspaper.
The reporter, Hannah Natanson, was at her home in Virginia when FBI agents knocked on her door to execute the search warrant, the newspaper reported.
Agents seized a phone, two laptop computers – one of which was issued to her by the Washington Post – and a Garmin watch, according to the paper.
Investigators told Natanson that the warrant was part of an ongoing investigation into Aurelio Perez-Lugones, according to the newspaper. Perez-Lugones, whom an FBI affidavit describes as a government contractor, was charged in federal court in Maryland last week for alleged unlawful retention of national defense information, according to the affidavit.
Natanson was informed by investigators that she is not the focus of the probe, the newspaper said, adding that she “covers the federal workforce.”
The FBI did not respond to an ABC News request for information about the search. However, FBI Director Kash Patel said in a social media post Wednesday that the FBI “executed a search warrant of an individual at the Washington Post who was found to allegedly be obtaining and reporting classified, sensitive military information from a government contractor – endangering our warfighters and compromising America’s national security. The alleged leaker was arrested this week and is in custody.”
“[A]t the request of the Department of War, the Department of Justice and FBI executed a search warrant at the home of a Washington Post journalist who was obtaining and reporting classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor. The leaker is currently behind bars,” Attorney General Pam Bondi posted on X Wednesday morning.
“I am proud to work alongside Secretary Hegseth on this effort. The Trump Administration will not tolerate illegal leaks of classified information that, when reported, pose a grave risk to our Nation’s national security and the brave men and women who are serving our country,” Bondi’s statement continued.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem arrives for the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing titled “Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security,” in Dirksen building on Tuesday, March 3, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem faced questions about immigration enforcement operations as she testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday — refusing to apologize or retract her statements about a U.S. citizens shot and killed by federal law enforcement in Minneapolis as “the definition of domestic terrorism.”
When pressed by Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, about why Noem labeled Alex Pretti, who was shot and killed by federal law enforcement in Minneapolis in January, a domestic terrorist without evidence, she would not admit she was wrong.
“We are working in those situations where there’s a tragic loss of life and that there is something that our agents are involved in, that we continue to deliver information,” she said.
Durbin then asked, “Is it so hard to say you were wrong?”
“I absolutely strive to provide factual information and will continue to do that,” Noem responded, adding that when the agency fails, they admit wrongdoing. Noem has yet to admit she has been wrong about how she characterized the Pretti shooting, as some have suggested.
Noem also said her characterization of Pretti — whose conduct she called following the shooting “the definition of domestic terrorism” without evidence — was based on information relayed to her in the hours after the incident.
Shortly after the shooting of Pretti, a Minneapolis Veterans Affairs ICU nurse, Noem drew criticism for insinuating he wanted to “massacre” law enforcement before the evidence and investigation was complete. Pretti was licensed to carry a handgun. Video from multiple angles showed that Pretti did not try to draw his gun from his waistband before or during the scuffle with federal agents.
Tuesday’s hearing marks the first time Noem is appearing before Congress after tensions in Minneapolis and the killing of Pretti as well as Renee Good, who was shot and killed by federal law enforcement in Minneapolis in January.
Two Senate Republicans have said Noem should be out of a job, and Democrats have called for her impeachment. President Donald Trump has repeatedly said he stands by Noem.
Later in Tuesday’s hearing, Noem said that there are no plans to deploy agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the polling places in November after President Donald Trump recently doubled down on his controversial suggestion that Republicans “nationalize” elections, saying the “federal government should get involved” in elections.
“We have no plans to have ICE officers or law enforcement at polling locations. States are responsible for running their elections, and we’re giving them tools and mitigation efforts that they can utilize in order to make sure they maintain the integrity of those elections, and that individuals can trust their systems to ensure that their vote counts,” Noem said.
Noem’s appearance on Tuesday marks the first of two days she is set to testify on Capitol Hill. She will testify before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
Her testimony comes as some parts of Noem’s agency — from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the Transportation Security Administration to the Coast Guard — are shut down amid a funding fight over Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Democrats have said they will fund the department only if changes are made to the agency in the wake of the shooting deaths of Good and Pretti.
In this Aug. 8, 2020, file photo, an offshore petroleum drilling rig is shown in the Gulf of Mexico. (UIG via Getty Images, FILE)
(WASHINGTON) — A federal committee, comprised of senior Trump administration officials, voted unanimously to grant an exemption under the Endangered Species Act for oil and gas operations in the Gulf, citing national security concerns.
Environmental groups criticized the decision, warning that it could significantly jeopardize the conservation of dozens of threatened and endangered species in the region, including whales, sea turtles, whooping cranes and manatees.
The Endangered Species Committee convened Tuesday after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a national security finding that triggered the exemption process.
Under the Endangered Species Act, the Endangered Species Committee can grant rare exemptions when a federal action is of national or regional significance and the benefits of proceeding clearly outweigh the benefits of alternatives that would conserve the species. Economic, security and other public-interest factors can be considered alongside conservation mandates, though exemptions are rarely used.
“At the request of the Department of War, the Endangered Species Committee convened today to consider a national security exemption under the Endangered Species Act with respect to oil and gas activities in the Gulf of America,” the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said in a statement to ABC News.
“The Committee voted in favor of the national security exemption, acknowledging the critical risks involved in restricting oil and gas activities in the Gulf of America, and also recognizing that the action encompassed protective measures for endangered species.”
Officials emphasized that sustained oil and gas production in the region is essential to U.S. national security and economic stability, and cautioned that critical energy operations should not be jeopardized by the threat of disruptive litigation.
The committee, created in 1978, is very rarely convened due to the strict, narrow standards for its implementation. It has not met in more than 30 years, and this is the first time a national security justification has been used to convene the committee.
The Endangered Species Committee, composed of the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Army, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, was fully present and voted unanimously in favor of granting the exemption.
“This meeting made clear that energy streams in the Gulf of America must not be disrupted or held hostage by ongoing litigation,” said Secretary Burgum. “Energy production in the Gulf of America is indispensable to our nation’s strength, safeguarding our energy independence and preventing reliance on foreign adversaries. Robust development in the Gulf keeps our economy resilient, stabilizes costs for American families and secures the U.S. as a global leader for decades to come.”
On March 13, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth notified Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, chair of the Endangered Species Committee, that a national security exemption under Section 7(j) of the Endangered Species Act, was necessary, prompting Secretary Burgum to publish a notice of the meeting in the Federal Register.
The meeting began with the defense secretary addressing the committee, stressing the importance of a steady, affordable domestic energy supply, which is currently under threat. He thanked the committee members for convening to discuss what he called “a matter of urgent national security.”
“This is not just about gas prices. It’s about our ability to power our military and protect our nation. That vital energy supply right now is under threat,” Hegseth said. “In January, well before Operation Epic Fury, the Department of the Interior notified the Department of War about ongoing Endangered Species Act litigation that threatened to halt oil and gas production in the Gulf of America.”
According to Hegseth, the litigation seeks to stop Gulf oil and gas activities rather than allow them to proceed alongside responsible endangered species protections.
“These legal battles waste critical government resources and make it impossible for energy companies to plan and invest in new projects. When development in the Gulf is chilled, we are prevented from producing the energy we need as a country and as a department,” Hegseth added. “The Strait of Hormuz is the world’s busiest oil route and recent hostile action by the Iranian terror regime highlights yet again why robust domestic oil production is a national security imperative.”
However, environmental groups argue this is not what the authors of this landmark law intended.
The Center for Biological Diversity sued Secretary Burgum on March 18, attempting to block the committee meeting, saying the government missed legal requirements, including filing deadlines, providing ample public notice, and having an administrative law judge preside. Following the committee’s decision, the group announced it will amend its existing lawsuit to challenge the defense secretary’s national security determination and the exemption.
“Americans overwhelmingly oppose sacrificing endangered whales and other marine life so the fossil fuel industry can get richer. This has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with Trump and his lackeys kowtowing to Big Oil,” Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement.
Environmental groups are particularly concerned about the Rice’s whale, which, according to NOAA, is one of the rarest and most endangered whales in the world and is found only in the Gulf.
NOAA Fisheries, which manages protections for marine species under the Endangered Species Act, listed the Gulf of Mexico Bryde’s whale as endangered in 2019 and, in 2021, updated its name to Rice’s whale to reflect the newly accepted scientific taxonomy and nomenclature of the species.
According to the Marine Mammal Commission, the most recent population estimates show there are only 51 Rice’s whales remaining.
The Rice’s whale’s small population, limited range and low genetic diversity make it highly vulnerable to threats such as vessel strikes and oil spills. NOAA says the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill exposed about 48 percent of its habitat in the eastern Gulf, likely causing a population decline of up to 22 percent and leaving lasting impacts on reproduction and growth.
The committee’s decision will not have any immediate effect, and lawsuits challenging the action could delay its implementation further. It could be several years before any future additional oil production tied to the decision is realized.
“The action could make it easier for applications to be granted for further oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf; but it takes several years between the filing of an application and the production of the first barrel of oil,” said Michael Gerrard, a professor at Columbia Law School and the faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. ”No court has ordered oil and gas production to be shut down in the Gulf, and such an order seems very unlikely.”
