Trump Tries to Limit Birthright Citizenship, Hormuz Deal, Iran War Fallout

The Supreme Court struck down the last attempt by the president to limit birthright citizenship. Now President Trump is trying again, this time with two executive orders that are narrower in scope will they be challenged in court. I'm Leyla Faudel, that's a Martinez and this is up first from NPR News. Iran has released details of an agreement it is finalizing with Oman to reopen the state of our moves. The critical waterway wouldn't be open to American and Israeli ships and the ships allowed through would be charged a fee. And President Trump's public messaging about what happens next in Iran is not matching reality. Why does that keep happening? Stay with us, we've got the news you need to start your day. President Trump is once again trying to put restrictions on who is automatically guaranteed citizenship after being born in the U.S. Less than two months ago the Supreme Court rejected Trump's previous attempt. It ruled the Constitution guarantees it reaffirmed this actually the Constitution guarantees automatic birthright citizenship to virtually all children born in the U.S. Trump's focus now is more narrow than last time. NPR's Juliana Kim is covering the two executive orders President Trump signed on Thursday. Juliana, what did they say? The first order looks to restrict who's eligible for birthright citizenship. That includes babies born to members of foreign terrorist groups or employees of foreign governments such as embassy or consulate staff who are foreign nationals. The second order says the administration will work to deny visas to people who it thinks are coming to the U.S. to engage in birth tourism. This is an issue that Trump has raised for years. The term refers to when pregnant foreigners visit the U.S. in order to give birth so that their newborn can obtain American citizenship. Senior White House Adviser Steven Miller was at the Oval Office when the executive orders were announced and he called the crackdown on birth tourism as one of the most important actions that Trump has taken when it comes to immigration. Because it ends what has been one of the greatest and most egregious abuses of the American system and it keeps American citizenship sacred. Juliana, you've reported on birth tourism. Tell us how big of an issue is this? Over the years, there have been some crackdowns on covert, lucrative businesses, kind of coaching travelers on how to conceal their pregnancies from immigration authorities. But set these scandals aside, the actual scale of birth tourism is unclear. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that in 2024, fewer than 10,000 babies were born in the U.S. to foreign residents. Meanwhile, the Center for Immigration Studies is a group that supports restricting immigration and by their estimate, temporary visitors gave birth to about 70,000 babies in 2023. Both estimates suggest that tourist births make up a small fraction of the 3.6 million babies born in the U.S. every year. And it's why immigration advocates argue that the issue of birth tourism is being blown out of proportion. How likely is it the executive order restricting birth right citizenship takes effect? Trump tried to restrict birth right citizenship last year through an executive order that when targeted babies born to parents in the U.S. illegally or on temporary visas. The order was quickly challenged in the courts and this June, the nation's highest court struck it down, reaffirming that birth right citizenship is guaranteed by the 14th amendment. And it's why some legal experts expect Thursday's executive order to also face legal challenges. I asked David Beard about this. He's an immigration policy analyst with the Kato Institute, a libertarian think tank. This is a situation where you would hope that the Supreme Court would step in very quickly to enforce its prior decision. Alad, the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about this. All right, that's NPR's Juliana Kim. Thank you very much. Thank you. We know more today about an agreement between Iran and Oman to reopen straight-of-war moves. Yeah, that's the critical shipping route that goes through the territorial waters of Iran and Oman. Ships have not been able to pass freely since the war began in February, blockaded by Iran and then the U.S. To discuss what this agreement might entail, we're joined now by reporter Samir Hashmim in Dubai. So what new details do we have based on discussions in Iran's parliament? Well, the Iran state media shared details of the agreement with Oman on Thursday. According to Iran, the deal bans any American or Israeli vessels passing through the straight-of-war moves. It will also find violators with up to 20% of cargo value. And countries and individuals deemed to have caused damage to Iran would be denied passage through the straight and the Persian Gulf until Iran is compensated for war damages. Iran says it will also be responsible for navigation guidance, monitoring vessel, traffic, maritime security, and environmental protection. Iran has also denied reports of a disagreement with Oman on toll charges. The fee according to the draft shared by Iranian media would be a combination of many variables. And as Iran said earlier this week, this all remains conditional on Washington ending its blockade of Iranian ports. As of now, Oman has still not commented on any of this. Okay, where about the reaction of other Gulf countries? There hasn't been any official response of the draft from other Gulf countries yet, but all of them have been pushing for a de-escalation. Even during the course of the war, the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar were attacked by Iran, and none of the oil producers, the Gulf oil producers have been able to export oil through the straight of Hormuz, which is also having a severe impact on their economies. So they are keen to have an agreement in place at the earliest that would allow the straight of Hormuz to be unblocked. And in the past, the Gulf countries have officially rejected Iran's proposal to manage and control the straight of Hormuz. They've called it a gross violation of international law and undermining the international maritime organization. Now, in the meantime though, the Houthi rebels carried out attacks against Saudi Arabia yesterday. Can you share any details on that? Yes, the attack was carried out inside Saudi Arabia's territory in the southern Nigerian province on Thursday. It endured 11 civilians according to the Saudi military. There was no immediate comments from the Houthis, but the Iranian back militia has increased attacks against Saudi Arabia in recent weeks, including attacks on Saudi oil vessels in the Red Sea that has disrupted oil supplies from the country. Now, the Houthis in Saudi Arabia, the two will locked in a war for many years that ended in a cruise in 2022, but the latest escalation risks and traveling that ceasefire. The Houthis also said that they attacked military camps in central Yemen yesterday, killing dozens of Yemeni government troops which are backed by Saudi Arabia. All right, that's a mere Hashmi in Dubai. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. President Trump has repeatedly said that no one will be allowed to control the Strait of Hormuz, which would suggest he will not go along with a plan that keeps American and Israeli vessels out of it. That sets up another potential confrontation between Washington and Tehran that could unravel many agreements to reopen the waterway. MPR White House correspondent Franco Ordonius joins us now to discuss the latest talks. Franco, the president, has said many times before that a deal was closed, but in particular, this week that a deal was really closed. So what happened? Yeah, it's just clear that what President Trump is saying publicly about progress is either not matching the reality of what is being discussed or at least not being understood by the Iranians. I mean, this idea of who controls the Strait of Hormuz is the same problem that led to the breakdown of the memorandum of understanding signed back in June. I was talking with Justin Logan, director of defense and foreign policy studies at the Kato Institute, a libertarian non-partisan think tank. He pointed to the breakdown over one single paragraph, paragraph five, still being the issue. It's a bit like the unstoppable force that meets the movable object. I mean, neither country's public position at least has changed significantly, and that was what caused the memorandum of understanding to implode in the first place. I mean, paragraph five said that quote, Iran will make arrangements and use its best efforts to facilitate traffic. Now, Iran interpreted that as they would be in charge of the waterway, but the US interpreted it differently as that things would go back to the status quo. But today, based on their competing statements, it just seems that little has changed. Yeah, so I mean, why does this keep happening? Well, I mean, the president is under a great deal of pressure to get out of this war, to reopen the straight, to get a handle on energy prices, gas prices. I mean, the president really wants to get the economy going again before the midterms, which were only a few months away. But he's also clearly looking down the road to what will be written about him in history books. Now, that's like exciting former president Herbert Hoover when he signed the memorandum of understanding in June. Yeah, exactly. I mean, he mentioned that time Hoover a few times when signing the MOU really out of concern for the economy. He mentioned not wanting to be compared to Hoover, who's known for not doing enough to stop the Great Depression. I mean, Trump's thrown so much military power at the Iranians to try to get get them to comply with his demands, but they're just not caving. And instead, they, the Iranians, are making so many demands of their own, especially about controlling the strait, hence this stalemate. And that is leading to concerns from observers, like Logan, who worry that ultimately to get out of this war, the US is going to have to accept something that is worse than the status quo, which was the Strait of Hormuz with freedom of movement. Right now, negotiations are focused on reopening the strait, and not, for example, nuclear weapons, which is what Trump continues to say was the reason for going to the war in the first place. Yeah, that's not the only thing that the President has been defensive about. What do you make of Trump's pushback on reporting that the Army is running low on munitions? Yeah, I spoke about this with Logan as well, and he said that the President is basically trying to deny the math. Logan said there is no question that the US has gone through a huge proportion of its patriot missiles and other munitions over five months of war, and he added that the US is known for launching a huge amount of firepower against an enemy in order to insulate the US, as well as regional parties from retaliation. And that's part of the reason Gulf allies are now wary of this war restarting again, as the last go-round was so tough, and now they feel that they will be even less protected by American missile defense systems. That's White House correspondent Franco Ordenius, Franco thanks a lot, thanks a lot. And that's up first for Friday, August 7th, I'm Emortitas. And I'm Layla Faldon, today's episode of Up First was edited by Emma Bowman, Kate Bartlett, Rebecca Matzler, H.J. May, and Alice Wolffley, it was produced by Ziyad Butch, Nia Dumas, and Ben Abrams. Our director is Christopher Thomas. We get engineering support from Nisha Hainas. Our technical director is Carly Strange, and our executive producer is Jay Shehler. Join us again on Monday.