President Trump says the U.S. mission in Iran is almost over.
I had one goal.
They will have no nuclear weapon.
And that goal has been attained.
They will not have nuclear weapons.
He says opening the Strait of Hormuz is someone else's problem.
I'm Michelle Martin.
That's Leila Fadl.
And this is Up First from NPR News.
Iran's effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent global gas prices soaring.
It's all a global market and it doesn't take that much to tip supply and demand into a place where suddenly we're in a global deficit.
US truck drivers, farmers and brewers are all feeling the ripple effects of the war on their bottom line.
And President Trump plans to attend arguments at the Supreme Court.
A sitting president has never done that before.
Trump's trying to end birthright citizenship.
What arguments will the court hear?
Stay with us.
We'll give you the news you need to start your day.
President Trump says the US will leave Iran in two to three weeks, declaring he's only ever had one goal in mind, despite repeating many others since the start of the US-Israel war on Iran five weeks ago.
I had one goal.
They will have no nuclear weapons.
And that goal has been attained.
They will not have nuclear weapons.
It isn't clear what the evidence is of that, but he's also saying countries who need oil to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran effectively shut down at the start of the war, will have to go and get it themselves.
Trump will address the nation at 9 p.m.
Eastern time tonight.
Here with the latest is NPR's national political correspondent Mara Eliasson.
Good morning, Mara.
Good morning.
Okay.
President Trump on Monday threatened to bomb civilian infrastructure if Iran didn't immediately open the Strait of Hormuz for business.
But now he's saying he doesn't care?
That's right.
This is the biggest swivel that Trump has made so far.
He has made a series of very harsh threats against Iran.
Less than 36 hours ago, he said he would bomb civilian sites, electricity plants, desalinization plants.
That might have gone against the Geneva Convention.
But he said if the Strait of Hormuz didn't open up shortly, that would happen.
Now, all of a sudden, it's no longer a goal.
He doesn't care.
He's washing his hands of this.
And someone else can deal with it.
Here's what he said yesterday.
We'll be leaving very soon.
And if France or some other country wants to get oil or gas...
They'll go up through the strait and almost straight.
They'll go right up there and they'll be able to fend for themselves.
I think it'll be very safe, actually.
But we have nothing to do with that.
What happens to the strait, we're not going to have anything to do with.
So, in his search for an off-ramp, he seems to be okay with Iran controlling the Strait of Hormuz, and this certainly is one of the biggest reversals that he's made so far.
Okay, but if he doesn't care about it, why was he talking about it so much and making these incredible threats?
That's a good question.
The Strait is really important.
About one-fifth of the world's oil passes through it.
Iran does have a stranglehold on global markets now.
So even if Donald Trump is now trying to argue that the 4 a gallon of gas doesn't affect us, it actually does, because oil prices are set globally.
Okay, so speaking of the $4 gas, what did he say about that?
Well, he said the answer was simple.
All I have to do is leave Iran, and we'll be doing that very soon, and they'll become tumbling down.
And maybe that's right.
But maybe the price hikes will have lasting effects, especially with Iran now charging big fees to allow ships through the strait and continuing to control it.
The president has also started to talk differently about regime change in Iran, which seemed to be one of the main goals originally.
What's he saying now?
One of the hallmarks of Donald Trump's political career is that he creates his own reality by talking about something over and over again.
And he's now saying that regime change has been accomplished because there are different people at the top of the regime, the others being killed by the US and Israel.
And yes, the leaders of the regime have changed.
He's right about that.
But whether the regime itself has become Any less anti-American, any less eager to cause havoc for the US and its allies around the world.
There's no evidence of that.
But this is part of Trump's mission accomplished, saying we have regime change and now the people running Iran are more moderate, nicer people who are easier to work with.
So what does this all amount to?
I think the president is looking for an off ramp.
He wants to say that he accomplished his objectives.
It looks like he's reached his political pain threshold, which is $4 a gallon of gas.
And this might be the endgame of this particular excursion, as he likes to call it.
But his political goals, including making sure Iran never has a nuclear weapon.
There's no evidence that they have been met, that the US and Israel will have to do this kind of thing again and again, and again.
That's NPR's Mara Liason.
Thank you, Mara.
You're welcome.
The US and Israeli war with Iran has pushed gasoline prices to their highest level in more than three and a half years.
But $4 a gallon gas is only the most visible sign of the war's impact on the economy.
Truck drivers, farmers, and would-be employers are all feeling the ripple effects.
Depending on how long it continues, the war could become a bigger drag on the economy in the US and around the world.
NPR's Scott Horsley joins us now to talk about this.
Good morning.
Good morning, Lily.
So tell us about some of the ways the war is already being felt in people's pocketbooks.
Obviously, anyone who's filled up a car or truck lately has seen the sharp jump in gasoline prices.
Diesel prices are up even more.
It's costing Pennsylvania farmer Rick Tellez a lot more to fuel his tractor since the war began.
When I caught up with him yesterday, Tellez told me he's also worried about the rising cost of fertilizer.
Well, it's that time of year actually putting nitrogen fertilizer on my hayfields.
Tellez says fertilizer that was selling for $500 a ton before the war now costs as much as $850.
So he's been forced to cut back, even if that might mean coaxing fewer bushels of corn and soybeans out of the ground this year.
I can't pass those added costs on.
It's just, I basically have to eat it all.
You know, grain prices have been really depressed in recent years thanks to bumper crops and President Trump's trade policies, which have cut into exports.
So farmers are really getting squeezed.
Their costs are going up, but when it comes to harvest time, there's no guarantee they'll earn that money back.
Court records show farm bankruptcies jumped 46 last year and the war only makes those challenges tougher.
Where else are we seeing wartime price hikes?
Well ultimately, those higher diesel fuel prices could raise the cost of everything that gets moved around the country by truck or rail.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development projects.
The war will push inflation in the US back above 4.
Even a six-pack of soda pop or beer could see a price hike.
Over the weekend, Iran attacked aluminum facilities in Bahrain and the UAE.
And Bart Watson, who's president of the Brewers Association, says that's pushing up the price of aluminum cans.
It's all a global market and it doesn't take that much to tip supply and demand into a place where suddenly we're in a global deficit.
And that means increasing prices for brewers and eventually consumers.
Watson says.
For now some brewers are absorbing those higher aluminum costs, but there may come a point where they have to pass the increase along.
Now, the US job market was already showing some cracks before the US and Israel started this war.
How is that likely to be affected by the fighting?
Yeah, employers were already skittish about adding workers, adding the uncertainty that surrounds energy prices and how much money consumers are going to have to spend.
And businesses are likely to get even more cautious.
Yesterday the Labor Department said the hiring rate in February, before the war began, was the lowest since the early months of the pandemic.
We will get a more complete look at the March job market on Friday.
Despite all this, the stock market soared yesterday.
What's that about?
Yeah, investors were cheered by signs from both President Trump and his Iranian counterpart that maybe a negotiated end of the war is in the offing.
That sparked a relief rally on Wall Street.
The Dow gained more than 1,100 points yesterday.
But this is not the first time investors have celebrated a possible truce, only to find out that they were premature.
So we will see if the optimism is warranted this time.
Even when the fighting does end, analysts say it may take some time to unwind the damage that's been done by this war and bring down the prices that the conflict has pushed up.
NPR's Scott Horsley, thank you for your reporting as always.
You're welcome.
President Trump is scheduled to be at the Supreme Court this morning.
A sitting president has never attended oral arguments at the court before.
The justices are hearing a case Trump has talked about a lot.
It's his challenge to a constitutional provision that has been interpreted for more than a century to guarantee American citizenship to every child born in the United States.
NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg is here now to tell us more about it.
Good morning, Nina.
Good morning.
So set this case up for us.
President Trump has long maintained that the Constitution does not guarantee birthright citizenship.
So on day one of his second term, he issued an executive order barring automatic citizenship for any baby born in the US whose parents entered the country illegally or who are living and working here legally on temporary but often long-term visas.
We're the only country in the world. that does this with birthright, as you know.
And it's just absolutely ridiculous.
Well, let me just jump right in on this.
Are we the only country that does this?
Is that true?
No.
There are at least 33 countries that have birthright citizenship.
So we're always hearing about the original meaning of the Constitution.
So let's go to the founding in the late 1700s first.
Did we have birthright citizenship then?
Citizenship wasn't actually defined then, but University of Virginia professor Amanda Frost, who I talked to about this, says the colonists were very pro-immigrant.
Against the king was that his policies were discouraging immigration.
Birthright didn't make it into the Constitution however, until after the Civil War, when Congress and more than three quarters of the states passed a constitutional amendment that defines citizenship in broad terms.
And it says, quote President Trump of course maintains that the amendment was only meant to ensure citizenship for former slaves and their children.
That interpretation however, has not been embraced by the courts or the legal norms of this country for the last 160 years.
So is there a key precedent that the people who disagree with Trump are relying on?
Well, the most often cited precedent is a Supreme Court decision involving Wong Kim Ark, who was born to Chinese immigrants in San Francisco in 1873.
His parents would eventually go back to China, but after he visited them there, he was denied entry into the United States on grounds that he was not a citizen.
He challenged the denial and won in the Supreme Court by a vote of six to two.
The court said that because he was born in the US, he was a citizen of the US.
But the Trump administration points to the court's language in the Wang case, language that seems to assume the parents were legally in the country because they had, at the time of Wang's birth, established a permanent residence, even though they subsequently returned to China.
And countering that argument, the ACLU's Cecilia Wong will tell the Supreme Court today that the men who wrote the 14th Amendment deliberately chose to confer automatic citizenship.
I'm the child, not the parent.
And the idea that actually goes back to the founding that in America we do not punish children for the sins of their fathers, but instead we wipe the slate clean.
When you're born in this country, we're all Americans, all the same.
And as I often say, we expect a decision by late June.
That is NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg.
Nina, thank you.
Thank you.
And that's Up First for Wednesday, April 1st.
I'm Laila Faldin.
And I'm Michelle Martin.
Today's episode of Up First was edited by Rebecca Metzler, Rafael Nam Krishna, Dev Kalimor, Mohamed El-Bardisi and HJ.
Mai.
It was produced by Zia Butch and Eva Pukach.
Our director is Christopher Thomas.
We get engineering support from Misha Hynas.
Our technical director is Carly Strange.
And our supervising producer is Michael Lipkin.
We hope you'll join us again tomorrow.
