Washington Journal on April 1, 2026, covers President Trump's unprecedented Supreme Court appearance in Trump v. Barbara, challenging his executive order ending birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. The broadcast details the Iran conflict's 33-day duration, NATO frustrations, and the Artemis II mission launch window at 6:24 p.m., while callers debate moon landing conspiracies, domestic policy costs, and historical comparisons to Hitler. Ultimately, the episode highlights a presidency simultaneously litigating constitutional limits on citizenship, managing global wars, and pursuing lunar exploration amidst deep public skepticism. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
Source
Participants
Main
e
elise labott
05:48
j
john mcardle
cspan48:32
z
zachary shemtob
17:48
Appearances
d
donald j trump
admin03:29
j
jeremy hansen
csa01:15
m
mark kelly
sen/d00:44
m
mike haridopolos
rep/r03:56
Clips
c
christina koch
nasa00:20
d
don bacon
rep/r00:13
p
peter doocy
fox00:09
r
ro khanna
rep/d00:04
|
Speaker
Time
Text
Moon Mission Excitement00:15:17
unidentified
Author Elise Labatt discusses the latest in the Iran conflict.
And then space journalist Kristen Fisher will talk about NASA's Artemis 2 mission and the future of space exploration.
Also, Spectrum News 13 Orlando space reporter Greg Pallone previews NASA's Artemis 2 mission and today's scheduled launch.
And SCOTUS Blog executive editor Zachary Shemtob on Supreme Court oral arguments in a case challenging President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship.
We're now less than 11 and a half hours away from the opening of the Artemis II launch window.
The countdown is underway at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
The targeted launch time is 6 24 p.m. Eastern.
The 10 day mission is set to mark the first human flight to the moon since 1972 and will test the systems that could be used in a future moon landing.
This morning, we're asking you is it all worth it?
Do you support NASA going back to the moon?
Give us a call.
On phone lines split regionally this morning 202 748 8000 if you're in the eastern or central time zones 202 748 8001 if you're in the mountain or pacific time zones.
You can also send us a text that number 202 748 8003.
That there's a whole lot going on on earth today, particularly when it comes to President Trump's schedule, his White House daily schedule, noting two particularly significant events.
The president is set to attend the Supreme Court case on the constitutionality of his birthright citizenship executive order, whether he can restrict or end automatic citizenship for those born in the United States.
It would be an unprecedented move, according to USA Today, of a sitting president attending.
A Supreme Court argument that's set to begin at 10 a.m. Eastern, and we'll have live coverage of that argument here on C SPAN later this evening.
The president is set to address the nation on a different matter on the Iran war.
The president is set to give that address at 9 p.m. Eastern, according to his schedule.
unidentified
Yesterday, it was White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt who noted the 9 p.m. address to the nation.
She said only that the president is set to provide an important update on Iran.
We'll have coverage of that as well on the C SPAN networks.
A lot going on today.
In Washington, a lot to talk about this morning on the Washington Journal.
And we're asking you this morning, we're starting on the Artemis II launch mission, asking you how interested you are in that mission, how important it is for Americans to return to the moon.
The stories about the moon mission have been making headlines all week long, and including in the New York Times.
unidentified
The headline in the New York Times Americans have never been all that excited.
The sub headline polling has consistently found that most people would prefer NASA spend money on things like monitoring climate change and averting asteroid collisions rather than human space flight.
We're wondering if you feel that way.
unidentified
It's 202 748 8000 if you're in the eastern or central time zones.
When I was young, I was inspired by the Apollo astronauts who showed me and so many other kids around the world how to dream big and reach for the stars.
And I'm excited for a whole new generation of kids to experience that same inspiration with the Artemis missions.
When we set out to do difficult things like land on the moon, it drives the kind of innovation that moves humanity forward.
Hey, we are really good at.
as Americans.
We're good at pushing the boundaries of what we thought possible and making the spectacular seem ordinary.
That's what makes NASA so special.
And we're going to see it on display with Artemis 2.
The launch is coming up soon, and I'll keep you updated.
If things go as planned this afternoon, you'll see it on display at about 6 24 p.m. Eastern Time.
We'll have coverage here on C SPAN.
Our coverage of the Artemis 2 mission actually.
Begins at 1 p.m. Eastern this afternoon.
We'll be showing you NASA TV's coverage and then we'll have our own studio program with your viewer call starting at about 4 30 p.m. Eastern time.
That's the plan for today.
That's the plan for NASA.
We'll see what happens as we get closer to that launch window.
It was yesterday at NASA's press conference leading up to the launch that NASA's Exploration Ground Systems Test Director, his name is Jeff Spalding, spoke about NASA's desire.
To continue with space exploration.
This was yesterday from Kennedy Space Center.
unidentified
I try to walk every day in the morning and I look up at the moon quite regularly thinking about this mission and upcoming missions that are going to be coming right downstream.
So I'm really excited about this.
I'm excited going to the moon.
I'm excited about establishing a presence there.
It's something that I have had a desire for for a great many years and then to get humans back out to Mars as well.
That's another thing that I had to, fortunately, I had the ability to work. on some of the studies that we did in the 90s on the Mars missions and things.
And so I have been looking for human exploration of this solar system for a very long time.
And it's part of the reason that I'm actually still here is to continue to put humans into space and to get us back into this launch mode that we are so that we can continue to explore and establish a moon base and then continue to work towards getting to Mars.
Others have turned towards astrology, a less scientific but increasingly popular way of divining meaning from the night sky.
The fervor is more than a fad, she says.
The number of students earning undergraduate astronomy degrees in the U.S. is at an all time high, quadruple what it was two decades ago, and that's fueled.
By a growing interest in STEM and new technologies, but also a deeper philosophical pull towards the big questions of life, asking if this moon mission is worth it.
What are your thoughts on going back to the moon?
unidentified
Again, phone lines split regionally, Eastern and Central, Mountain and Pacific.
We'll also look for your texts and for your tweets and social media posts.
We will start with Joe, though, on the phones from Maryland.
Joe, good morning.
unidentified
Good morning.
I am supportive of the Artemis mission because I am supportive of people having a better idea of reality.
I have too many friends and family who, you know, don't believe in the moon landing or think that the Earth is flat.
And if I could editorialize a little bit, you know, I think that there is a problem with reality with the, you know, current administration and president.
He just got on yesterday with an executive order to, you know, try to, Federalize elections and punish people who don't follow along.
And it seems like with 30, you know, constantly accusing other people of cheating, but with, you know, like 30 different flipped elections all towards Democrats in the last year, I would think that, frankly, like any Republican victory in November should be looked upon with scrutiny.
Well, Joe, with that political division, do you think an Artemis II mission, a moon mission, is something the country needs right now?
unidentified
Honestly, I think it's a bit of a stretch, like when people hear my reasoning, perhaps.
But I made a claim, and I believe in the claim that I just made.
But other people might strongly disagree with me.
But if we can observe more of the universe than we have, observe physical reality, even though it might not be salient and we might not think that it matters, it's the more about the world that we can observe and agree on.
It's very important for us.
To be able to stake out common space so that we can have a common way of speaking.
Because there are different worldviews that people have based on, for instance, whether they believe the Earth is round or flat.
And it does get back into other things that we believe.
John Glenn went up in space when I was in the fourth grade.
We have a problem with doing Earth.
We are destroying Earth.
Why do we want to touch somewhere else when, in fact, we can't support what we're doing here?
We have income that's being spent everywhere else.
We have no taxes being spent in other places.
Our health care and everything that this Trump administration is doing is destroying the country as a whole and the world because of wars.
Why do we want to go destroy something else when we can't even control what we have here in America?
Now, I know I heard you last Saturday ask about the.
Three different phone lines.
I would like for you all to add another line for Americans because the other three lines are all about a party.
They're not about the country.
And they need to stop being about a party and start being about this country that we do have and are controlling instead of worrying about going somewhere else to destroy it.
Do you remember anything about the last time Americans walked on the moon?
unidentified
No, no, I was, uh, Because I was born in '66, so I don't remember that.
The earliest memories I have was the Apollo Soyuz in '75.
And I remember that on TV.
And that was all animation.
They didn't have any footage of that, you know, but I remember that distinctly showing the, you know, at that time they reused the Apollo module to link up with the Russian Soyuz.
His column on the Artemis II launch notes that President Trump is set to turn 80 this year.
He grew up in the days of Apollo when spacefarers voyaged to another world and fired imaginations back on the one that they left behind.
Mr. Trump, however, wants to top the achievements of Apollo 11 and its brethren a moon base, a nuclear rocket, a trip to Mars, and whatever it will be, it has to be huge and it has to get started before he's due to leave office in January of 2029.
The New York Times' Peter Baker continues by saying the man who slaps his names on buildings and dreams.
Of adding his face to Mount Rushmore, hopes to make history by pushing space exploration to new heights, literally and figuratively.
No president since NASA's glory days under John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson has pressed the space agency as hard as Mr. Trump.
And today, that mission is set to go further around the moon than any of those Apollo missions, farther beyond the dark side of the moon.
It's a 10 day mission, and again, it's set to launch at 6 24 Eastern.
That's if the window holds.
Much earlier today, we'll be having history in another way here in Washington, D.C. As we noted, President Trump announced yesterday that he intended to go to the Supreme Court arguments that are taking place today on his birthright citizenship case.
It was confirmed in his daily schedule that was released this morning.
Because I have listened to this argument for so long, and this is not about Chinese billionaires or billionaires from other countries who all of a sudden have 75 children or 59 children in one case or 10 children becoming American citizens.
I, I, I just, I, I, I do not, I do not believe that at all because I mean, I, I remember watching every shuttle that went up.
I enjoyed watching every landing.
I think it's genetics.
I'm totally into it.
I worked in the space program as well.
I worked for companies, uh, that provided the pumps that pumped the fuel and, and, you know, you just growing up with it in your family and your blood.
And I'm just, I am going to be so ecstatic for the success of this mission, and you just can't get a better feeling from it.
And we need it.
We need it.
I mean, talking about a waste of money, there's being money wasted in other ways.
I do not ever see space exploration as being a waste of money.
And I want to compliment Christine for saying some of the things that I would like to say, but I definitely want you to know I watched the moon landing, the first one in 1968, and I was so thrilled.
We were having parties in our block.
We were in our early 20s, In our block, everyone was having a party in their backyards and looking up at the moon and pointing and saying, There's a man up there.
People were talking like that.
I called my grandma in another city.
I was in Illinois at the time and she was in Michigan.
And my grandmother, who had been born in the 1890s, when I called her, I said, Grandma, there's a man on the moon.
Do you know they're walking on the moon?
And she said, They say they have.
So that was her attitude at her age.
And I find, I know that the people who are calling and who are very negative.
Are saying, yes, the money should be better spent.
I absolutely agree.
I think that everything pertaining to the war has been negative.
But I think the fact that man can dream and then make those dreams come true through having the infinite ability, the abilities that really only were given to him by someone upstairs, to be able to get us this far.
And I remember the day that, of course, we lost the astronauts when the plane exploded.
These are times that we have to try to remember man can be better than what we are seeing and hearing every day.
The whole thing, I'm also someone who I do take our lives on this earth and everyone's life seriously.
Because on the day that, I'll be frank, I turned on the television and I learned that the East Wing had been knocked down.
I said, but nobody asked us, did we want that East Wing taken down?
So we have so many things that are going on that are negatives.
And yes, indeed, we do need to have everyone to be insured.
We don't need to have billionaires becoming wealthier and those who don't have anything having nothing.
But I've lived 88 years and I still can rejoice that man has been, for the most part, always, and especially in our blessed country, trying to do the right thing by other humans.
Jane, you talk about remembering running out and people pointing out to say there's a man on the moon.
Do you think we've lost that sense of wonder?
Can we get.
Can we get that again?
unidentified
I don't know because I'll tell you something, and you may or may not have thought of this in your own life, but I've told this to many younger people and they are astounded.
The times that we have lived in since John Kennedy, and I worked on his campaign, it was the first time I could vote.
I was 21 at that time, and I could finally vote at 21 then.
And when he was assassinated on November 22nd, 1963, when he was assassinated, most people today would not be aware.
Of how astounded and how shocked we were.
And I say that because if you check history, the only president prior to that had been McKinley in 1895.
Destination Beyond Earth00:09:05
unidentified
And so there had been that much time, even though we'd had a Second World War and the horrors of that, we had never had a president who had been assassinated.
I mean, Abraham Lincoln is towards the end of the Civil War.
No, I mean, directly from 1890.
They tried to kill.
Franklin Roosevelt in Illinois in the 30s.
But no, no one had been assassinated, is what I'm saying to you, since 1895.
Gotcha.
And so, any of us born from the period of time 1895 to 1963, we did not actually think that our own president could be assassinated.
And the final thing I'll say take it like this I'm not particularly religious, but I can remember when in the public schools we did have prayers.
And in 19, I was.
10 years old in 1947, our teacher told us that day after lunch, she said, Boys and girls, we're not going to have our final lesson today because we're going to have to say a prayer.
She said, President Eisenhower is going to Europe.
And it was only then 47, it was only a couple years after the war had ended.
She said, And there are, well, no, I'm incorrect.
It was 1952 because he wasn't president until 52.
So it was 1952 that he was going to Europe.
But she said, President, Eisenhower is going to Europe, and she said, We don't have to worry about him when he's in America, but we're going to have a prayer for his safety while he's traveling in Europe because there are people there that don't like him.
I can remember that, and I can't remember any other prayers that we had in school, but now that shows you from 1895, and then suddenly here comes what happened to our President Kennedy, and then after that, we had MLK, and we had, you know, we had RFK.
To talk about it and then all the other things that have been terrible, and of course, the use of guns, guns, guns, and so on.
I should say six times, six other missions to the moon.
Twelve total Americans have walked on the moon, and the Artemis mission is the mission that will begin man's return to the moon.
This mission to test the systems that could set up a moon base on the moon, and then that being a springboard.
To Mars.
It's happening today.
It's the first step in the process.
We're showing you the outline of the route around the moon, slingshotting around the dark side of the moon, and set to come back over the course of 10 days.
Of course, I remember how we got to the moon and why a Democrat sent us there.
And the Democrat Party has changed so significantly since then, I don't even recognize it.
The Democrats were the ones that wanted to step out into the universe and make advancements in medicine and electronics and aerospace.
And the very thing that I'm watching today, and I've got the sound turned down, but I'm looking at that screen.
The things that occurred during the space program that President John F. Kennedy put forth so strongly, okay, these are the things that we benefit from today communications, travel, in terms of our, you know, being able to, our defense systems and geo tracking.
And it's just an amazing thing that occurred during the 60s with putting man on the moon.
And I bet you if you look at it, We probably got tenfold return on our money, maybe even a hundredfold return on our money by investing in that program.
And we benefit every day from it.
And I have no doubt that this program and others to come will advance mankind so that we have new medicines, so that we have the advancements that we use every day.
I mean, people don't realize the thing I'm talking to you right now on resulted from.
The space program and all the satellites that we put in space today that aid us every day in everything that we do came from the space program.
And so it just amazes me that my party, the Democrat Party, is the one that said, listen, we're going and we're going to benefit from it.
Mankind's going to benefit from it.
And my party today doesn't want to do anything like that.
So, yesterday we spent some time with our geology team lead, Kelsey, just going over the plan.
And depending on which launch day we launch in this window, you know, how that changes.
But looking at some of the details that we're going to be examining and the things that they're interested in, specifically different colors or just different shades, variations in the albedo of the moon.
They're very interested.
We look at it from different angles and different lighting.
With sort of under this microscope all the time, and then every once in a while, I step back, sort of like you did last night, and just look at it.
I really feel like, gosh, that is really far away, and it just gives me great appreciation for it.
And in the night sky, I've spent a lot more time looking at it through binoculars in my backyard, sharing that with my family.
We've got the binoculars here, and hopefully, we'll get some clear skies.
They weren't last night, but for us, but hopefully, we'll get some clear skies and some good viewing.
But the other thing we've focused on quite a bit of a As a crew, is just listening to other people's perspectives on the moon and how different cultures look at the moon.
And when we go back, honoring just how humanity, we all share the same moon in the sky, but honoring humans around the world and how they revere the moon.
Bill, one of the things you said right at the end of your question was how do we feel as the people that can call the moon the destination, a destination, not just something we're looking at?
And it is our strong hope that this mission is the start of an era where everyone, every person on Earth can look at the moon and think of it as also a destination.
The four astronauts could launch as soon as 6 24 p.m. Eastern Time.
Our coverage of the Artemis II launch begins with showing you NASA's coverage at 1 p.m. Eastern today, our studio production where you can call in and talk about it.
That'll take place starting at 4 30 p.m. Eastern Time, and then we take you live to Kennedy Space Center.
With everything going on in Washington today, aside from the launch taking place in Florida, we want to turn to our open forum.
There is a lot going on.
President Trump is now set to attend that Supreme Court argument at 10 a.m. Eastern Time.
We'll see what that arrival looks like altogether when he arrives on Capitol Hill at the steps of the Supreme Court.
And we'll talk about that later in the program.
Also, today, the announcement last night from White House Press Secretary Caroline Levant that the president is set to give an address this evening from the White House.
To provide, as she said, an important update on Iran.
To talk more about Iran on this, the 33rd day of that conflict, we're joined once again by Elise Labatt, global affairs journalist.
unidentified
Her sub stack is Cosmopolitics.
Elise Labatt, what do you expect President Trump to actually say tonight in the Oval Office?
Well, what you've seen over the last few days is that he's backing away from the idea that they're going, that you thought maybe in the beginning that this war was going to expand, that possibly there would be regime change.
He's being very narrow, it seems, now.
And even opening the Strait of Hormuz right now doesn't really seem to be one of his main goals.
I think, talking to people that are close to him and what he's thinking, is that he's going to move towards saying we're meeting all of our goals and we're going to be out in the next few weeks.
It kind of reminds you a little bit of President Bush when he had that mission accomplished sign behind him.
In terms of going and getting things in Iran, the president posting on True Social, it was about this time yesterday, his frustration, particularly with the United Kingdom not helping as much as he'd like in this war effort, saying, go get your own oil.
unidentified
How did that go over yesterday with U.S. allies overseas?
Well, U.S. allies have been really frustrated because President Trump didn't consult with them, didn't talk to them about what they were doing, and now he's asking for their cooperation.
And they're saying, it's not our war.
Why should you ask us to fight?
But while there may be a legitimate claim and he didn't consult with them, these oil markets and this Strait of Hermos is a very big global situation for all of the allies.
You know, the European allies are using natural gas and oil that comes from the Strait of Hormuz just like any other country.
And so, you know, some military and diplomatic experts are saying, yes, you know, we didn't consult.
Let's deal with that later.
Let's get that straight open.
And there's a lot you can do.
They have better mine sweepers.
The Iranians are putting mines on the ground there.
They have better mine sweepers.
Some of the U.S. mine sweepers are elsewhere.
And so, if the U.S. could concentrate, On the ground, on the operations getting rid of all those targets, and the Europeans could do the Strait of Hormuz, you know, that would be probably desirable.
But at the same time, you would think that the president will put together what they call a coalition of the willing, and that hasn't happened.
But the truth is, you know, we've fought wars in Europe over history that weren't necessarily U.S. wars.
The U.S. has always been there for allies, and now President Trump is saying, let's be there for us.
You know, you look at President at Secretary Rubio's comments yesterday.
What did you think about the juxtaposition of President Trump venting his frustration, particularly with the United Kingdom and Keir Starmer and what we had talked about of not helping as much as he'd like, and then posting on his true social account the upcoming state dinner for King Charles and the visit to the United States and how great that visit is going to be?
Well, you know, obviously King Charles is, you know, the sovereign head of the United Kingdom.
King Charles doesn't run the government per se.
Those policies are really the policy of Keir Starman.
I think that's probably how he's justifying it.
But it was a little odd, right, that he's welcoming King Charles for a state dinner.
I honestly don't think President Trump, you know, kind of thinks of it in those kind of connections.
I do think that he, One of the things I interviewed a general, General Mark Kimmett, who's been on this show before.
I spoke to him yesterday, and he said that the U.S. and Iran, or the U.S. and Israel and Iran, are fighting two different wars.
The U.S. is fighting a war of what he calls annihilation, which is go after all those targets, totally dismantle the missile program, Iran's weapons program.
The Iranians are running a war of endurance, or what he calls exhaustion, and both think that they're winning.
The Iranians are winning in the sense that they're closing the Strait of Hormuz and they're really squeezing the global economy and the oil market.
The U.S. and Israel are winning because they're going after those targets.
It could go on for another few weeks, but if you do have the U.S. going into Iran and getting rid of that rich uranium, it does, as we said, put U.S. troops in significant danger and there could be many casualties.
I'm going to be looking to see what the Iranians say.
I'm pretty sure they're going to spin it as the U.S. is capitulating.
They're going home.
They don't even care about the Strait of Hormuz because they know they can't open it.
We've got the great Satan by the neck.
I'll also be looking to see what the Gulf states say because.
Is Iran going to stop their attacks on Gulf states?
And then, you know, the Iranian people, John.
Originally, President Trump said this was about helping the Iranian people when they were having that horrible crackdown by the Iranian regime, killing thousands of people that were in the streets.
That quickly turned to well, maybe there could be regime change if we weaken the regime and the Iranian people go out and do it.
This is not regime change, what we're seeing.
We're seeing leadership change, but there's no evidence that the Iranians have changed in any way.
If President Trump does leave without finishing the job, at least on the nuclear program, I think there's going to be a lot of consternation about what the Iranians do next.
This is Lucas, Stevens Point, Wisconsin Independent.
Lucas, good morning.
unidentified
Yes.
Hello.
Yeah, I want to talk about Iran.
I think there's a significant difference in what we understand in American media versus what is being presented through Al Jazeera, Al Menar, through a lot of the regional news outlets.
And I think.
There's some pretty significant power imbalances that we've been seeing between America and Iran.
America is attacking largely civilian targets at this point.
And they claim that they're now targeting civilian infrastructure as though it's targeting the regime.
But they're just targeting civilians.
And it's ridiculous.
And what we're going to see tonight is we're either going to see Donald Trump capitulate to the sovereign nation of Iran, or we're going to see.
A ground war that's going to last for the next eight years.
And we're not going to be fighting militants.
We're going to be fighting an armed state that is prepared and has been ready for this for the last, what is it, 50 years at this point.
Marco Rubio, who has been somebody in the past who's been very supportive of the NATO alliance, and I'm thinking back to particularly his Senate days and his run for the presidency, did that surprise you, the comments, him saying we might need to rethink this relationship?
unidentified
It really didn't surprise me because I live in Florida and I've been watching Rubio.
Sort of disintegrate on his policy arguments.
Remember, he's the one who called Trump a con man and now he's working for him.
But my bigger concern is that he, like everybody else in the cabinet, has to march at the drum beat of Donald Trump.
They are not independent thinkers or they're afraid to be.
And Trump is a person like a little child who sits in the corner and makes noise and makes a mess.
He needs attention.
And I'm concerned about the fact that what he's going to say in the evening.
Speech because whatever it is, it's going to be incoherent and be more concerning.
I will add one thing.
I think Iran is kicking our butt, small k kicking, and we have no way now to go forward to end this other than to capitulate.
So, Chris, a good place to go is the Arms Control Association.
They try to track the number of nuclear arms for the countries that do have nuclear arms.
And I don't know the number, but a number for Israel.
But the head of the Arms Control Association, Daryl Kimball is his name, he comes on this program often and takes questions about nuclear proliferation and efforts to try to stop that.
unidentified
You might want to check out one of his recent segments on that topic.
Their headline simply Trump is wrong about birthright citizenship.
You can read that in the New York Times or you can pop over to the Wall Street Journal, their opinion page.
The headline there Trump is right on birthright citizenship.
That piece by Randy Barnett, faculty director at the Georgetown Center for Constitution, co author of The original meaning of the 14th Amendment, its letter and spirit.
So take your pick on the page of the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times.
You can watch the oral arguments.
You can listen to the oral arguments on C SPAN.
We'd love to give you a view inside the chamber, but we haven't been able to do that just yet, despite our efforts over the years to get cameras in the court.
These are the cameras outside the court.
Folks already starting to go in.
The proceedings begin at 10 a.m. Eastern, just over two hours from now.
What happens to the Strait, we're not going to have anything to do with because these countries, China, will go up and they'll fuel up their beautiful ships and they'll leave and they'll take care of themselves.
There's no reason for us to do it.
We hit them hard.
We got rid of a lot of the radicalized lunatics along the Strait.
But if they want something, but I would say that within two weeks, maybe two weeks, maybe three, We're hitting them very hard last night.
We knocked out tremendous amounts of missile making facilities, as you probably read or wrote.
That mission is set to launch around 6 30 p.m. Eastern, but our coverage, our live coverage from the Kennedy Space Center with expert analysis and your phone calls, that'll begin at 4 30 p.m. Eastern.
We'll also on C SPAN 2, starting around 1 p.m. Eastern, show you NASA TV's coverage of the launch.
So, plenty going on on all the C SPAN networks today.
We hope you stay with us all day and a busy day.
Here in the nation's capital and around the world.
Coming up a little later in our program today, it's SCOTUS Blog's Zachary Shemtob.
We'll discuss today's Supreme Court argument, but first, it's space journalist Kristen Fisher.
She joins us to discuss the Artemis II mission to orbit the moon.
That discussion when the Washington Journal continues.
unidentified
Get C SPAN wherever you are with C SPAN Now, our free mobile video app that puts you at the center of democracy, live and on demand.
Keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the U.S. Congress, White House events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips.
Catch the latest episodes of Washington Journal.
Find scheduling information for C SPAN's TV and radio networks, plus a variety of compelling podcasts.
The C SPAN Now app.
Is available at the Apple Store and Google Play.
Download it for free today.
C SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
A new era of space exploration begins.
C SPAN brings you live coverage of the Artemis II moon mission launch.
Join us today at 1 p.m. Eastern for real time video from the Kennedy Space Center and Houston Mission Control, plus expert analysis, briefings, news conferences, and live viewer calls.
As America prepares to return astronauts to the moon.
And be sure to stay with C SPAN after liftoff for continued live coverage throughout the mission and the splashdown.
Don't miss special coverage of the Artemis 2 launch live today at 1 p.m. Eastern on C SPAN, the C SPAN Now app, or at C SPAN.org.
In a divided media world, one place brings Americans together.
According to a new MAGAD research report, nearly 90 million Americans turn to C SPAN, and they're almost perfectly balanced.
Twenty eight percent conservative, twenty seven percent liberal or progressive, forty one percent moderate.
Republicans watching Democrats, Democrats watching Republicans, moderates watching all sides.
Because C SPAN viewers want the facts straight from the source.
No commentary, no agenda, just democracy, unfiltered every day on the C SPAN networks.
C SPAN is as unbiased as you can get.
You are so fair.
I don't know how anybody can say otherwise.
You guys do the most important work for everyone in this country.
I love C-SPAN because I get to hear all the voices.
You bring these divergent viewpoints and you present both sides of an issue and you allow people to make up their own minds.
I absolutely love C-SPAN.
I love to hear both sides.
I've watched C-SPAN every morning and it is unbiased and you bring in factual information for the callers to understand where they are in their comments.
This is probably the only place that we can hear honesty.
opinion of Americans across the country.
You guys at C-SPAN are doing such a wonderful job of allowing free exchange of ideas without a lot of interruptions.
Thank you C-SPAN for being a light in the dark.
Celebrate Cherry Blossom season in Washington, D.C. with C SPAN.
Visit C SPAN Shop.org and explore our limited time Cherry Blossom collection, now 10% off.
From stylish apparel to mugs and unique accessories, there's something for everyone.
Every purchase supports C SPAN's nonprofit mission.
Scan the code or go to C SPAN Shop.org today and bring home the beauty of the season before it's gone.
Best ideas and best practices can be found anywhere.
It's just across the Indian River from Merritt Island and NASA's Kennedy Space Center.
Kristen Fisher joins us.
C-SPAN viewers might recognize her from her previous work as a White House correspondent for Fox News.
More recently, she's worked as a space contributor for CNN.
Today, she's hosting and producing the launch party for Endless Void Studios.
Kristen Fisher, what's the launch party?
What's Endless Void Studios?
unidentified
John, we're trying to do live launch coverage a little bit differently because.
NASA and really, I think the entire space industry has a bit of a communications problem, and it's not totally their fault.
I get it because I'm the daughter of two NASA astronauts, and I totally took space for granted because I grew up my entire life.
People have been going to space.
I was born into a world where man had walked on the moon, and I think the American public takes a lot of this for granted.
And so I'm trying to change that.
I'm trying to throw a launch party, which is no anchor desk, there's no scripts.
We're not using any insider jargon or NASA acronyms.
We're trying to make this really accessible and digestible for everybody.
And have a good time doing it because you know what?
When I'm down here and I'm not working and covering a launch, when I'm watching a launch with other people in the space industry, it's always a very celebratory environment because we're celebrating all Earthlings venturing deeper into space.
It's something that benefits, I believe, all humanity.
That's what I'm trying to capture with Launch Party.
And we're going to be broadcasting live from this epic location, the space bar on top of the courtyard, Titusville.
And right there, don't mind the sun, but right there is the launch pad.
And you mentioned your family's biography a little bit there.
I want to give viewers a little bit more about you.
This is courtesy of a YouTube video you posted last week in the lead up to the launch that's set to take place today.
Take a look.
unidentified
This is me.
I was born into a world where both my parents were NASA astronauts.
Anyone should have cared about space, it was me.
But I took it all for granted.
Oh boy, space suits.
My mom, Dr. Annalie Fisher, was one of NASA's first women astronauts.
And because of me, she became the first mother in space.
Say, have a good launch, mommy.
And my dad, Dr. Bill Fisher, is a wild man.
He was a gymnast, gyrocopter pilot, member of a Hawaiian nudist colony, and a doctor all before finally achieving his lifelong dream of walking in space.
By golly, kid, y'all gonna be an astronaut?
So everyone always asked me if I was gonna be an astronaut too, including.
President Ronald Reagan.
Anna, I couldn't help but wonder if you'd recommend a career as an astronaut to your daughter, Kristen.
Well, that I would, Mr. President, and I'm going to recommend it to her highly.
But I didn't listen.
It all just felt so normal, so routine, so boring.
It felt like humans had been flying to space forever.
Kristen's all excited, isn't she?
Yeah, she's really up for it.
Hey, Kristen, lighten up.
I clearly had no idea how special this was until I moved away from home.
It took me getting some distance from my childhood, my neighborhood.
I grew up five minutes away from the Johnson Space Center.
It took me going to college and telling people, you know, people ask, oh, what do your parents do?
And I was like, oh, both my parents are astronauts.
And they were like, what?
And, you know, I'd just grown up with it my whole life.
I didn't think it was unique or interesting or different or, dare I say, even cool, you know?
And so it just took me growing up.
I think to really stop taking it for granted.
And then I had kind of an epiphany moment in college, and I called my dad one night at like midnight, and I said, You know, dad, oh my gosh, like you went to space, you've walked in space, and yet I've never really had a conversation with you about it on a deep level.
And so that night, that changed.
And I have really spent the rest of my life just feeling this really deep calling that I need to carry on my parents' legacy.
In my own way.
And so, what I'm doing here today, Launch Party, is really my way of trying to make up for all those years that I took space for granted and help other people not take space for granted, too.
For folks watching, for folks who saw that video, they might say, I get it.
She has a family connection.
She had this epiphany moment.
But they don't have that connection.
If you look at the latest polling from Ipsos, this just came out yesterday the economy and foreign conflicts are now the top two issue concerns for the American public.
And space exploration, not even on the list.
unidentified
So why are we doing this?
There are, I mean, it's a fair question and you get it a lot.
And space is just something that we feel so disconnected from because we can't really see it or touch it or feel it, especially when we all live in cities with light pollution.
We've completely lost our connection to the night sky and the stars.
And so I understand why people feel so disconnected from space.
But I believe and many people believe that this is humankind's destiny, right?
That our future, our species survival, Depends on us figuring out a way to extend humanity, to extend consciousness to the moon, to the Mars, to the stars, and beyond.
So there's an element of species survival, but then there's also a huge element of national security that's playing out right now.
I think Christina Cook, who's one of the crew members on the mission, the Artemis 2 mission that's launching today, said it really well in her last interview before launch.
She said, Look, people are going to the moon, and the question for Americans and American taxpayers is do we want to lead?
Or do we want to follow?
China's going to the moon, and China is going to build a base on the South Pole of the moon, and there are valuable resources there resources in the form of helium-3 and water in the form of ice, which can be used to sustain human life and create rocket fuel to build a base, to create rocket fuel to take people to Mars and beyond.
I just said the Mars like Trump did.
Forgive me.
But so it's resources, it's national security, and it's species.
At one of those press conferences, you asked those astronauts that are set to go up today about how they're preparing their families for this dangerous mission.
Why did you feel like that was what you wanted to ask, especially with your position as the daughter of two astronauts?
unidentified
Well, obviously, it's very personal to me.
I don't think we talk about the risk enough.
This is one of the riskiest things a person can do, right?
The first test flight, the first crude test flight of a brand new spacecraft, that has only happened a few times in NASA's history.
And I just had Jared Isaacman, the NASA administrator, sitting right here with me last night.
We had a 30 minute interview the night before lunch.
And I asked him about that how does he think about the risk?
Process the risk.
And, you know, he just said it's a risk that he believes humans have to take.
But he was, it was so refreshing because he was really willing to engage and talk about it.
Whereas I feel, you know, in previous NASA administrations, historically there's kind of an urge to sweep the risk under the rug and not talk about it.
And I think that's part of the reason that the American people have stopped caring about it as much, is we've just tried to sanitize it.
And when you try to sanitize the risk, It just makes you grow kind of numb to it.
This is one of what we're going to see today is one of the, you know, embarking on one of the most dangerous human adventures of all time.
And it's a risk that these astronauts know they're taking, their families know they're taking it.
They've had the hard talks, they've had the conversations about where is the will, what's going to happen if I don't make it.
And I just think we should honor that by acknowledging the risk as well.
I want to promote the phone lines for viewers to call in this morning to talk about.
The Artemis 2 mission.
Kristen Fisher is with us, and she is with Endless Void Studios.
The launch party is what she's hosting today.
Phone numbers call in 202 748 8000 if you're in the Eastern or Central time zones, 202 748 8001 if you're in the Mountain or Pacific time zones.
We've got about 20 minutes left with her to get to your calls.
As folks are calling in, Kristen Fisher, stay on that risk for a second.
Did your parents ever talk to you about the risk that they faced?
I know you were a baby at the time that they were going up in the space shuttles, but six space shuttles.
Five actually went to space, and two of them blew up upon launch, and the other on reentry.
It was a dangerous program that they were embarking on.
unidentified
It was.
And they absolutely knew the risk.
Those videos, those home videos that you were sharing from my YouTube channel just a few minutes ago, I have 20 hours of those kinds of home videos from the year before my mom flew in space.
And she flew when I was 15 months old.
And the reason I have all those videos is because my mom and my dad were acutely aware of how risky it was.
They were acutely aware that there was a chance that she would not come back.
And so they made all those videos so that I would have something to.
Remember her by.
My mom and dad also wrote letters to me, and my sister wasn't born at the time, but they wrote letters to us in the days and nights before launch.
So they were very aware of it.
We talk about it.
We actually talk about it more now, even though it was so many years ago.
But it's something that I just think about.
It is the thing that I'm thinking about on launch day, and it is the thing that Jared Isaacman.
Was thinking about when he was here last night.
I said, What is the moment that you're looking forward to the most on this mission?
Is it the lunar flyby where they get close to the moon?
Is it the moment when the pilot and commander are going to get to manually control the Orion spacecraft?
A moment that every fighter pilot and test pilot looks forward to.
And Jared Isaacman said, No, I am most looking forward to the moment I see those parachutes open and they splash down safely back on Earth.
Well, she's with you for the launch and she's going to join you at launch party.
unidentified
She's with you for the launch party.
Yeah, she's going to be serving as kind of our mission control.
And so I've done live streams with my mom before for launch.
And every time she always gets kind of annoyed when I'm talking to her and she doesn't have headphones in and she can't listen to what's going on.
Her own area with headphones so she can really listen in.
And then, you know, I'm doing this with a five person crew, but I don't have a team like I used to at CNN or C SPAN or things of that nature.
So she's also, in a way, kind of serving as my producer and writing me little notes if there's any updates or holds in the countdown or issues or hydrogen leaks, things of that nature.
So she's actually a critical part of my team this morning.
Viewers can see the first mom in space, Dr. Anna Fisher, now age 70, at the launch party night, launchpartylive.com.
Let me get to some callers, and there are plenty waiting to talk to you, Kristen Fisher.
It is Heather out of Alabama up first.
Heather, good morning.
You're on with Kristen Fisher.
unidentified
Hi, good morning.
Thanks for taking my call.
I just wanted to let you guys know that I'll definitely be praying for a very safe launch because in the 80s, I remember being in school watching, you know, the one that didn't go so well.
And we just all sat there in shock.
But the one thing that I really, really am hoping that at the end of the day, we don't do is really try to like live on the moon.
I mean, we're not really doing such a great job here taking care of this earth.
Like to keep the moon intact while we can, but so I just want to make sure I don't miss it.
So, what time is this all supposed to happen today?
And Heather mentions the one that blew up going up.
That would be Challenger 1986.
I did want to note that C SPAN has a new history of the space shuttle program, a documentary, an original documentary, airing on American History TV at 5 p.m. Eastern on Saturday on C SPAN 2.
If you want to watch that, I hope you do.
unidentified
Ms. Fisher, what did you want to take from that call?
Oh, Heather, I want to change your mind about the lunar base because, and look, I hear you.
We have a million problems here on Earth and we're all feeling them very acutely right now.
But I do believe it's not an either or that we could potentially work on both things at the same time.
And let me just paint a quick vision for you of why a lunar base could benefit things on Earth.
And not just a lunar base, but space stations that humans live and work on, larger ones than what we have now.
One of the problems that we are Going to and are already encountering as humanity continues to grow and consume resources on planet Earth, you know, it's obviously a problem.
And so, one of the pros of building a base or these big space stations or a variety of other things in the orbits of the Earth or the moon is that we could move heavy industry off planet Earth and into space and take the load off Mother Nature and the environment.
Space Industry Benefits00:03:12
unidentified
And one of the most immediate examples that we're seeing people.
Try to work on, of course, is data centers in space.
So, right now, you know, with AI exploding, data centers consume so much water, energy, infrastructure.
And so, there is a massive movement among companies like SpaceX, a variety of other companies, Google.
Everybody is now looking at trying to figure out ways to move data centers to space.
And there's one company in particular that's trying to build data centers in lava tubes beneath the surface of the moon.
The reason for that is that it would kind of serve as a backup center for all of Earth's data.
So, again, if Earth were to get hit by an asteroid, and maybe humans don't deserve to live on.
I mean, maybe an extinction event is what we need, given how we're acting these days.
But if we do want to preserve both our DNA and some of the thoughts and ideas and data that we've created, lava tubes beneath the surface of the moon would be a good place to do that.
Waiting for you on the line from Brooklyn, New York, it's Alan.
Good morning.
You're on with Kristen Fisher.
unidentified
Good morning.
Thanks very much for the conversation.
I was noting that this is the first capsule of manned flight to the moon or any capsule that will be using deployable solar panels.
And I think it's a very wise thing to do.
And considering that the current administration has been doing so much to oppose the deployment of solar and wind on Earth, it may give us a new perspective on the importance of doing for Earth what we've been doing to improve our space capsules.
You remember Apollo 13 when the Tanks that had the fuel for the fuel cells, both for propulsion and also for electricity, some of them were lost in that explosion on the command module.
If they'd had solar panels, they would have had probably less of a problem coming up with the amperage they needed to survive while they were using the LEM as a lifeboat to get around the moon, come back, get back in the command module, and get back into a safe splashdown.
And also in Apollo 13, there was the scene where they had.
Carbon filters that kept the carbon dioxide levels livable within the craft that were different sized modules in the LEM and the command module.
And they had to come up with some jerry rig that the astronauts could actually do on their own with tape and tubes to turn the square entry point into a round receptacle to use the LEM's filter on the command.
I remember that scene well from Apollo 13, from the movie.
Kristen Fisher, how.
Some of these movies about the great achievements of NASA from Apollo 13, the right stuff, how this has sort of shaped our view of that agency, especially at a time when views of government agencies are not very high in public polling.
NASA always does better than the rest.
unidentified
They do.
They're consistently ranked the top federal agency to work for.
NASA Movie Legacy00:02:51
unidentified
And you can certainly feel that here today.
I think one of the things that One of the tragedies of the last few decades has been just kind of the decline in this area, Florida's Space Coast, especially when the space shuttle fleet was retired back in 2011.
And so what we're seeing now is really this resurgence up and down Florida's Space Coast from where I am in Titusville to Cocoa Beach to Cape Canaveral.
And it was really crystallized in some of those earlier movies that you were talking about, like.
The right stuff, and to see how you know our whole space age and this kind of Cocoa Beach surf culture really grew up side by side.
You used to see that a lot in the movies, you don't see that as much now, but it's something that I think is just a really special part and special piece about this place of the world.
It really feels like a sacred place because you know this is where humanity really first learned to leave Earth.
So, I feel really lucky, I've got this incredible.
And it might be a good time for you to talk about the location you picked for the launch party today, where you'll be.
unidentified
It is a great view behind you, but where are you physically?
So, I'm on the rooftop of a hotel that's called the Courtyard Titusville.
It is a Courtyard Marriott, but it is not your typical Courtyard Marriott because it is, it's hard to describe what it's like here.
It's a who's who of everybody in the space industry.
I mean, billionaire space founders have stayed here, astronauts stay here, the whole Artemis II crew has stayed here at one point.
I mean, the whole hotel is packed.
It's been sold out for weeks, and it's really the last stop.
Before the Kennedy Space Center.
If you just drive across that bridge right over there, you're going to hit the Kennedy Space Center.
And so I really wanted something that was close to the launch pad.
You got to be able to see the launch pad, and we can.
But, you know, when you're at the Kennedy Space Center, you're kind of restricted in terms of who you can talk to and what you can do on launch day.
And one of the things I've always missed is I love being in a crowd.
I love feeling the energy of a crowd.
And it's just, you know, the media.
And I love the media, but it's just the media over at the KSC press site.
And so I.
I decided to hold this here at the Space Bar on the rooftop of the courtyard, Titusville, so I could invite about 30, 40 people up here and have, you know, a.
I hate, I like using the word party, but I'm also cautious of, you know, using it too much in the sense that, you know, as we've talked about, this is such a risky endeavor today.
Rare Earth Moon Mining00:07:19
unidentified
But we are.
We're going to have a watch party and a launch party and have a bunch of people, fans, people from California and Canada that I've Never met before.
So just to get everybody together and get their take on what this moment means to them.
Time for maybe one or two more phone calls with Kristen Fisher this morning with Endless Void Studios.
This is Darren in Colorado.
Darren, good morning.
unidentified
Hey, good morning, Jen.
Good morning, and Ms. Fisher.
I'm so glad they had you on today.
It's a refreshing change from talking about politics.
Just a couple questions, maybe you can answer.
I know that the theory is that the moon was formed from a collision with the Earth.
So I was wondering is there a possibility for rare earth elements to be found on the moon?
And if so, I also wonder about since it's always exposed to solar radiation, extracting resources such as water, you know, and like you said, turning that into fuel, how does that?
process work.
And I guess my last comment is I know China's really at the forefront of exploration.
We're kind of doing catch up.
It would be nice if there was a way that countries could work together.
It seems like we could be so much farther along in our understanding of the moon and its processes.
The reason the United States and China cannot cooperate together is because of the Wolf Amendment.
It's an amendment that was passed by Congress.
It is the law of the land, and it prohibits NASA from working with its Chinese counterpart.
So there have been multiple attempts to get rid of it.
So far, it has not succeeded.
But yeah, there are a lot of people who feel the way you do that if China and the United States could just work together, we could advance so much.
Faster in space.
But then, you know, you talk to other people who say that's just a nice fantasy and that it's never going to happen because, you know, many people in the U.S. government believe that China wants to militarize the moon, although they would say the same thing about us.
In terms of your questions about the minerals, I think I'd mentioned before helium-3, we know is on the moon in large quantities.
Water in the form of ice, which may not sound very valuable to us because it's in abundance on planet Earth, but there it would be a big deal because.
Water's heavy.
It takes a lot to transport water from the Earth to the moon.
And so, if you have it there, that's a big deal for astronaut survivability, but also for the creation of rocket fuel to get you further into deep space going forward.
The big question is in terms of getting helium-3 back to the Earth, or if you land on an asteroid, and certainly on asteroids, you're going to have some incredibly valuable rare Earth minerals.
Great.
But how do you get it back to Earth?
So that's something that a lot of space startups are working on right now.
I mean, just being here, I am within two minutes of arriving at this hotel.
I walked in and I noticed everybody going upstairs.
I had no idea what was going on.
There just happened to be a launch, right?
It was a routine Falcon 9 launch now.
But the fact that that's routine and you just see that every other day here on the space coast, I'll never get sick of it.
And then, if you, I mean, you can't see it now, the sun's really not helping, but This is the skyline, so to speak, at the Kennedy Space Center.
It is changing so rapidly.
I was here in January, and since I've been here in January, SpaceX has built this huge facility to house its Starship rocket, the biggest, most powerful rocket ever built.
And it's going to be launching likely from here later this year or early next year.
And so, just the amount of stuff that is changing and happening feels so exciting.
And then to have Jared Isaacman announce last week that starting in 2027, we're going to have Monthly robotic missions to the moon, monthly?
Wow, you know, I mean, that is just the pace of this.
If it all comes to fruition, it really feels like finally, after so many years, this like, you know, long period of time where humans were stuck in low Earth orbit after Apollo, it really now feels like finally it's changing.
And Kristen Fisher, I don't think we've ever had somebody who's both their parents were astronauts on this program before.
Before you go, the final two minutes here, what did your parents tell you it was like to be in space?
unidentified
Well, I mean, it was the highlight of their lives.
My dad got to do a spacewalk, which was his lifelong dream.
His teacher in first grade, in his report card, which my dad saved, complained about how Billy would be such a good student if he could just get his head out of the clouds and stop being so rocket conscious.
I mean, he just, to be able to fulfill that childhood dream for him, I think was the highlight of his whole life.
And it changed him profoundly as a person.
And the same with my mom.
Just last night, she was saying, God, I'd give anything to.
See it one more time.
And I said, See what?
And she said, See Earth.
Like to see Earth like that.
Her biggest takeaway was just, you know, when you look back on planet Earth from space, and this is a phenomenon known as the overview effect that many astronauts experience, you don't see borders.
You don't see different countries.
You just see one big blue planet and you realize that we're all Earthlings.
So those were their biggest takeaways.
And then, John, before we go, I just have to share with you one thing this shirt that I'm wearing, it's very special.
It says, I've got it.
On the front, Columbia 1981.
Columbia 1981 Launch Fever00:05:06
unidentified
And on the back, it says launch fever.
This is the shirt that was made for the very first space shuttle launch back in 1981.
And, you know, there can be so many negative connotations with the phrase launch fever, the thought that, you know, perhaps people at NASA would be moving too, trying to go too fast to put speed over safety.
But there's another meaning for it.
And it's just this feeling of pure excitement.
For this moment and what we may potentially witness today.
And so I've been saving this shirt for today, and it just felt like the right time to wear it.
From the president's schedule, we found out this morning the president will make an unprecedented appearance at the Supreme Court today.
He intends to attend the birthright citizenship arguments at the Supreme Court.
That case is set to take place starting just after 10 a.m. Eastern Time.
We're expecting the president to arrive before then.
We don't know much about the arrival.
What it'll look like, what door the president may enter.
But you can see security already tight at the Supreme Court.
And some of those activists are already there and folks there to talk about the case, to talk about their views on the case, gathering on the steps of the Supreme Court.
That's just across the street, First Street on Capitol Hill from the Capitol, the United States Capitol.
There in the background is the Library of Congress.
It's all together here on the Capitol Hill complex.
So we'll see how it looks when the president arrives.
Again, 10 a.m. Eastern, and you can listen to live coverage of the arguments.
The case' official name is Trump versus Barbara, beginning just after 10 a.m. Eastern.
Also, today on President Trump's agenda at 9 p.m. Eastern tonight, he's set to address the nation.
An update on Iran is what we're being told.
The president's address from the White House will air on C SPAN, 9 p.m. Eastern, also on cspan.org and the free C SPAN Now video app.
Also, today, our coverage of that Artemis 2 launch continues throughout the day, starting at 1 p.m. on C SPAN 2.
You can watch NASA TV's coverage of the launch, the countdown clock now under 10 hours until the launch window opens.
Our studio program here at C SPAN will begin about 4 30 p.m. Eastern.
Yeah, I'm just calm, basically, about the space thing going up again, Artemis.
I can't figure it out.
I'm 79, and they went up 54 years ago.
And I don't know if they take us for dummies or what, but if they could land on the moon 54 years ago, say they didn't have no money in the accident, so they quit going.
The lady I talked to before might not be right on target, but she's close.
On the history of the space program, the cost and public support from it, let me just read from today's New York Times their story Americans have never been all that excited about going to the moon.
The story quotes Roger Lonius.
A space historian who previously worked for NASA and the Smithsonian Institution said, It's almost always about the budget.
In poll after poll, the story writes, During the 1960s and early 70s, a majority of Americans said the Apollo program was not worth the cost, with one exception.
In July 1969, the month that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first astronauts to step on the moon, a thin majority, 53%, agreed that Apollo had been worth the money.
Spending for NASA peaked in 1966 at 4.4% of the federal budget.
And then it started dropping.
In recent years, it has accounted for about 0.5% or less of federal spending.
Part of the challenge then and now is to put forth a compelling case for why we choose the moon.
And once NASA beat the Soviets there in 1969, many people saw little reason to continue.
The New York Times story today about Americans never being all that excited about going to the moon.
I'll admit to being a skeptic and a cynic about the moon trip.
My understanding was that this was a precursor to someday launching from a weightless moon to Mars.
Why go to Mars at all?
It's uninhabitable.
You could not live on Mars, you'd have to live within a structure on Mars.
And the cost of doing that is only going to escalate for a country that's deeply in debt.
I don't understand the trip to the moon, but your caller earlier pointed out something as a skeptic that I could see that we're concerned about our security on this planet from our enemies or our adversaries, and we need to get to the moon so that they don't control the moon.
And if that's the real reason we're going there, then that should be told to the American people because the investment we're making is so enormous while we're allowing this country to burn up.
Literally, flood, literally, and the environment to fail to continue to allow us to grow and expand our crops and our agriculture.
The money should be invested in protecting what we have, unless there's a darn good reason why the moon is so essential.
Going to the moon to build a colony there is not enough.
And I'm sorry that Kristen Fisher's 30 minutes didn't expand on anything that was of information.
Value.
Her personal story was very interesting, but it was not informative and not substantive.
According to today's Washington Post, the program, the Artemis program, expected to have cost about $105 billion over the past 20 years, $105 billion.
We talked about the budget for the Apollo program peaking at about 5% at the height of the program.
Today's mission is not about landing on the moon, it's about going back to the moon, going around.
The dark side of the moon, although they will be setting a new record on going some 4,600 miles beyond the far side of the moon.
It's the farthest distance traveled beyond the moon.
And so these astronauts will be the people who have traveled farthest from the Earth when all is said and done.
It's expected to be a 10 day mission launching from Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
The Washington Post asking how soon could astronauts walk on the moon?
The timeline would be a bit flexible.
NASA.
Had originally planned the mission for 2024 before delays and a revamp of the Artemis program.
Artemis 3, the next mission, is scheduled for 2027.
And that system is designed to test systems and operations with landers being built by SpaceX and Blue Origin to prepare for a possible landing under Artemis 4 in 2028.
So several years until humans could actually set foot on the moon again.
This mission is starting to demonstrate the technology about going back.
Going that far.
This is Brenda in Pennsylvania.
Democrat, good morning.
unidentified
Good morning, John.
My topic for today is the birthright citizenship case.
I hope you can hear me all right because the operator said there was some tapping on the phone.
Could you make your point pretty quickly and then that'll work?
unidentified
Okay, well, as far as birthright citizen, the only proof of true citizenship is if you have the documents that your ancestors completed the citizenship process and took the citizenship oath.
That is the only.
True form of proof that you are a United States citizen.
I'm really glad to see that Democrats and Republicans are coming together on this Artemis thing.
I believe that you don't take a trip when your credit card is maxed out.
And I've read that the moon shuttle costs $35 billion and used $60.
Thousand gallons of fuel per minute.
We're concerned about our fuel, we're concerned about our money, and it seems like a ridiculous thing.
What I would like to see in our town, if we want something big, we have a ballot on it, and everybody gets to vote on it.
And it would be amazing if every voter in the United States were assessed, say, $3,000.
To send this thing to the moon.
I'll bet people would really change their mind if they're not using other people's money.
I wanted one more mention since I'm on the line.
This Jeffrey Epstein thing, they keep talking about the victims and the survivors.
And I'm saying, where are the parents?
Because I have worked with refuge centers taking care of victims and survivors of sex trafficking.
And they're nothing like the girls we see on TV.
These kids are drug addicted, they're in rags, they're skinny, they're poor, they really, really need help.
And the so called survivors are rich and kind of assertive.
And I think I really condemn Epstein for what he did, but I think we have a strange thing calling them survivors when they're real survivors of sex traffic in the world.
I don't have anything on shipbuilding at my fingertips this morning for you, Richard.
I do have something on another building project, and it's a high profile one taking place here in Washington, D.C.
This is the story from the Washington Times today.
A federal judge has halted President Trump's plans to build a ballroom on the site of the old White House East Wing, saying that he acted rashly in moving ahead without Congress and must go to Capitol Hill for permission.
Before continuing any work, Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee to the court in the District of Columbia, previously allowed below grade work to continue for safety and security concerns.
In his new ruling, however, he said that he concluded that the president didn't have the power to unilaterally demolish a part of the White House complex and then build a new structure on his own say so.
Quote The president of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of first families.
He is not, however, the owner, the judge said.
That's the latest front page story in the Washington Times today.
This is Dutch.
Out of Boston, Democrat.
Good morning.
unidentified
Yeah, good morning.
Yeah, I just want to make a couple comments like about President Trump talking about this voting thing.
I said, every time they commence and he's talking about voting, they should show that tape of him in Georgia begging for 10,000 votes.
He's talking about all this cheating and stuff going.
He's the one that's cheating.
We never heard so much about cheating people running for office since he started running.
Nobody talks about cheating, nobody cheating on anybody.
But this bum here, he can't lose to nobody without saying he was cheating or he was robbed.
And then he got his two sons.
Whether or not his son, his son, and this real estate guy running around like they're professional, what do you call it, diplomats and whatnot, going to different countries begging for money.
Him and his two sons, dude, doing the same thing, $451 billion or something.
The president is set to address the nation on Iran.
Here's the latest story from the Associated Press.
The major developments.
President Trump said the military could end its Iran offensive in two to three weeks and will shift responsibility for the Strait of Hormuz to countries that rely on it for oil and shipping.
The White House announced that primetime address on Wednesday evening.
And some continued latest updates.
Again, the Associated Press is a great place to go for all the latest, although the president's True Social page, also a place where you can get the president's thoughts immediately, including this from about 8 44 a.m. Eastern Time.
This is the president on True Social.
Iran's new regime president, much less radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors, has just asked the United States of America for a ceasefire.
We will consider when the Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear, the president writes.
Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion, or as they say, back to the Stone Ages.
And he signs it President DJT.
So that's the ladies from the president from about 13 minutes ago.
John in Portland, Connecticut, Republican, good morning.
unidentified
Morning, sir.
How are you?
Doing well.
Three quick points, John.
Earlier, you had a caller, a Republican caller, was making some comments about how C SPAN is run, and you cut him off to the quick.
The second one is you just had a 90 year old man calling my president, Donald J. Trump, an idiot.
And I've heard your host in the past say we don't call names of our, we don't call people names on this program.
Obviously, it happens every day.
I hear it, see it, and I record it every day.
So I don't know what's up with C SPAN, but you guys let this go on all too long.
People disparage the President of the United States constantly.
He's my President.
I don't know if he's your President, John, but I know he's my President right now.
I don't agree with everything the man does, but let the man finish what he's trying to do until the next administration comes in.
I hope we hear some positive things that this war is going to be, I don't call it a war, whatever, it's over with, and that we get things straightened out.
We get the Straits of Hormuz opened to everybody.
And let's get back to regular business around here.
I mean, this thing has been awful, this war.
Thank God right now, no boots are on the ground right now.
And I appreciate our government doing that at their best.
But.
If we have to have some boots on the ground, so be it.
But we've got to settle this thing.
And we've got to work together.
I wish our country, both sides of the aisle, would work together and make this thing happen.
That's all we need us to do, is to reunite our parties together.
So I think the most important thing we've got to look for is if the House and the Senate turn and they impeach him, then the Second Amendment's going to have to take place.
It will be at the heart of today's birthright citizenship case.
And it is the 14th Amendment, the first section, the first clause.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
Expect to hear a lot more on that at today's Supreme Court hearing.
Again, President Trump set to make an unprecedented appearance.
It's on his daily schedule.
He said yesterday that he intends.
To go to this oral argument.
It begins in less than an hour up here on Capitol Hill, and we'll watch to see if and when the president shows up at the United States Supreme Court, how that entry will take place.
We've got cameras up there.
We'll show you what we can see when that all happens again in the next 60 minutes.
This is Darrell in Caldwell, Idaho, Independent.
Good morning.
unidentified
Good morning, John.
The astronauts, when they go around the moon, they'll be coming back, and when they do, There's a scripture in Job chapter 26, verse 7 God says he hangs the earth upon nothing.
So they'll get a view of that.
And yet we spent $350 billion for the Ukrainian war.
And this space trip we're going on isn't anywhere, I think only maybe a third of that.
So this complaint about the money being spent here and there, it comes down to where it all depends on where your criteria is.
And I look at the fact that here on this earth right now, Nobody realizes that in the future it says there will be combat on such a manner that if there is no God, we're going to destroy ourselves.
So nobody seems to be worried about that.
At least the Iranians have built a huge underground thing because they know our attitude is the United States will kill anybody anytime if you don't agree with us.
The President of the United States has no authority whatsoever to take over the mail in ballots.
That is why it's written in the United States Constitution that the states have the power to run their elections the way that they see fit.
Every time MAGA Republicans lose an election, The first thing out of their mouth, oh, the Democrats rigged it.
Well, to be honest with you, I think the 2024 presidential election was rigged due to the fact that we had bomb threats that was caught into heavily Democratic areas in all battleground states.
What are you watching for as the clock ticks down?
What could change things here in the next nine hours and 20 minutes or so?
unidentified
Well, fueling is going on right now.
So the rocket's being fueled.
It began at 7 30 this morning.
Takes about five and a half hours.
So that process will be ongoing as we speak.
So the team will be monitoring that.
Of course, they're in constant communication with the crew to make sure that everything is going on with the timeline.
But things seem to be going good so far.
Again, this is the first crewed mission for this rocket, so NASA is definitely going to take all those precautionary steps to make sure everything is going good with the timeline.
But as far as we know, right now, everything is a go.
The timeline is launched today around 6 24 p.m. Eastern, a 10 day mission.
Explain what happens at the end of this mission.
Where will the astronauts return?
When and how?
unidentified
They'll have what we call a Pacific Ocean splashdown.
That's where the Orion capsule will splash down.
They'll be recovered there.
And then they'll go into quarantine for a little bit of time.
They want to check their health and make sure everything is going well with them.
The point of this mission is to see not just the steps for landing on the moon on the next Artemis mission, but also to see how the astronauts fare in that deep space realm.
They'll be going further than any humans have ever gone.
That will exceed the Apollo 13 mission.
You'll remember that when NASA had to bring those astronauts back because of an emergency in space as they were preparing to land on the moon.
They had to bring them back.
So, they'll be heading further into deep space than any humans have ever gone.
Of course, part of this is to gauge and figure out exactly how these astronauts fare with the deep space radiation.
Also, just being in that amount of space or the amount of time in space for that duration.
Because what we're hoping, at least what NASA is hoping, to go on deep space missions to Mars and beyond.
So, this is sort of a litmus test, sort of the appetizer to the main course.
And Greg Pullin, you've been down there for over a week now.
What will you take away from looking back on this launch and the lead up to the launch?
Who are some of the most interesting people that you've chatted with down there?
unidentified
Well, one gentleman, former NASA astronaut Doug Hurley, that we talked to, he was the pilot of the last space shuttle mission.
He also was the first of two crew members to fly on the first commercial mission to the International Space Station.
He just gives a great perspective on this because, you know, everybody talked about when the space shuttle program was retiring back in 2011.
What's going to happen to NASA?
Are we going to explore?
Well, NASA made it their mandate to explore deep space and to leave low Earth orbit to their commercial companies like SpaceX, and they've been extremely successful.
And so, what SpaceX and the other companies have done, they've delivered cargo and crew to the International Space Station.
Of course, that's in low Earth orbit.
NASA's mission became to explore deep space, to go to the moon, Mars, beyond.
So, there are just a lot of interesting people that sort of made that transition from the shuttle, which stayed in low Earth orbit, to now Artemis, which is heading to deep space, the moon, and beyond.
So, just to see that kind of configuration going from low Earth orbit to deep space and explore because You know, as NASA says, their mission is to explore the universe and to make mankind better here on Earth.
We are waiting for the president expected to leave the White House anytime in the next.
40 to 50 minutes or so.
He's expected to arrive just about a mile and a half down the road, down Constitution Avenue here on Capitol Hill, across from the United States Capitol, across First Street.
It's the United States Supreme Court.
That is where the birthright citizenship case is being argued today.
President Trump has said, and his schedule says, that he will be in attendance.
And we will bring you the live oral arguments here on C SPAN after our program again, 10 a.m. Eastern.
Also, don't forget the president tonight at the White House and address on Iran, 9 p.m. Eastern.
We're also going to bring you that on C SPAN.
So, plenty to happen, plenty for you to watch, plenty happening all day long here on a busy April 1st in Washington, D.C.
This is Kenneth in South Carolina.
Democrat, thanks for waiting.
unidentified
Go ahead.
Yes, good morning.
I want to know this man done went to and took the.
The White House and add this other piece to it.
Plan to add that other piece to it.
But if you ran a building and you tore it up, you should be responsible to rebuild it.
The money that needs to be spent to rebuild this area, I think he should be charged for that.
And also, we didn't have all these problems with voting and everything else until President Trump came into a stage.
We had all these problems.
And these walls that he's getting himself into.
We are now alone.
All the allies is nowhere to be found.
He wants them to come and help us when he didn't even advise them, but he went out there and do these things.
I got a son inside the military, and I got to be up at night waiting and wondering what's going on with him and will he be in harm's way.
And his son should go out there and, you know what I'm saying, he should be worrying about these things that we are worrying about.
And I was thinking that is.
It is a crime shame that we have somebody in the White House that doesn't care about nobody but himself.
I do want to note the latest on the president's plans for his presidential library.
It's going to be built in Miami, Florida, in downtown Miami.
This is the story from the Wall Street Journal today.
In a nearly two minute video posted on social media on Monday night, the president previewed for the first time the design of the library, and you can see some of the video images.
In that design, expected to be one of the Jets used as Air Force One incorporated into the library.
It's set in downtown Miami next to the Freedom Tower.
You may know it as one of the landmarks in downtown Miami.
The Trump Presidential Library would be built right next door.
And again, here's some of the images that Eric Trump, the president's son, posted in the preview from Monday night.
Back to your phone calls.
This is Eve in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Democrat, good morning.
unidentified
Yes, good morning, John.
It's been a minute since I called in.
Matter of fact, it's almost a year now since I called in because I just can't take it anymore.
And I have not, you know, I have not really been watching because it's so disturbing to me.
So, my comment today is on mail in voting.
You know, John, it's my daughter and I decided to do mail in voting.
And this is what a lot of people don't understand.
When people go in, To vote, they mostly vote for one person.
But if you go down through that ballot and research all these people that you're, that's coming along with the ballot that you voted on, that you don't even skip or whatever, they have no idea.
These people, the background of the people, you get to research the background, all the people on the ballot, and it's really educational to know what these people are about.
You would not vote for those people if you knew who they were on the ballot.
I don't care if they were Democrats or Republicans.
You would not vote for some of those people because you know something about them.
And people don't know this.
So, I think that, and with Donald Trump trying to do away with mail in voting, no, it will never happen in Michigan.
I know that for a fact.
So, I'm just saying people get more time to sit down with their ballot and research what's on the ballot, all the proposals and things like that that they don't usually go through.
And I want to add something else in.
Donald Trump has been the worst person ever in office.
Well, John, thanks for the opportunity to be on this morning.
The why we have to go back to the moon is a very logical question.
We need to go back to the moon because it is the place to be to eventually make our way to Mars.
And of course, there are incredible opportunities on the moon.
As you know, in the southern portion of the moon, they might call it the South Pole, there is potentially water.
That means hydrogen.
That means potentially fuel.
And also, you have a thing called helium-3 on the moon, which helps us as we move towards more nuclear power here on Earth.
The goal long-term is to go to Mars.
And this will be literally our launching pad to go to Mars because, as you can imagine, these big engines that are needed right here with the Artemis program are needed to get out of our atmosphere.
Once we're out of the atmosphere, it's a lot easier to move through space.
So that might be our next launching point as we make our way to Mars.
And so America is moving in that direction.
And I can't forget, of course, the idea why we're in space in general.
It's not just for commercial satellites, it's also to protect our military and establish the GPS necessary as we take on different conflicts around the world.
My district is in central Florida on the east coast.
If you know where Kennedy Space Center is, almost directly east from Orlando, the center part of the state, down south to Vero Beach, it covers two counties, which is called Brevard County, where Kennedy Space Center in the north end is located here.
And then Vero Beach is in Indian River County.
It's an area that usually votes red, and it's one in which, again, not only Kennedy Space Center is located, but also you have major programs for space and defense contractors as well.
And it's known for its incredible waterways.
It's called the Banana in Indian River.
And of course, we're one of the surfing capitals of the world.
You may have heard of places like Cocoa Beach and, of course, the famous Ron John Surf Shop.
And since you've been so involved in this effort down there at the Kennedy Space Center, can you just explain if something happens, the weather changes or something this afternoon, what is the backup plan?
How many opportunities do we have here over the next couple days?
As I understand it today, approximately 20 members of Congress will be here.
Our leader is Dr. Babin, who chairs the entire science committee.
He's the former chairman of my committee, the space subcommittee.
He has been integral in making sure that Artemis happened.
Because remember, a few years ago when President Obama chose to eliminate the shuttle program, we were wondering what's next.
Well, what's next is Artemis.
And we are so excited about getting back to the moon in a couple of years.
And we have really come together in a team effort.
And as you know, there's a lot more activity here, not just with NASA, but also SpaceX, Blue Origin.
ULA and so many new companies that realize that space is the future, whether it be for energy needs or computing needs, are a medical break for you.
So it's a big day for NASA, but it's really a great day for America to come together in a bipartisan way to support NASA and our astronauts who are putting their lives in the line to make sure that we make the next step in the age of space.
Well, if it's a major Supreme Court argument day, it's a good day to be joined by Zachary Shemtob, the executive editor of SCOTUS blog.
It's SCOTUSblog.com.
Of course, Zachary Shemtob, the big news President Trump says, and his daily schedule says, that he is going to the oral arguments, an unprecedented move by a sitting president.
I would have to think that Chief Justice Roberts is not the biggest fan.
He does not like the idea of it becoming, you know, a circus, and it would be a circus if any president attended whatsoever, or for that matter, any real public figure.
So I can't imagine Chief Justice Roberts is a fan of this.
I don't think the justices are necessarily going to, it's going to make them lean one way or the other.
But most of all, for them and for court security and for everyone else, it'll be a big headache.
So, Barbara is the representative plaintiff for a nationwide class or group of children and families challenging the executive order ending birthright citizenship, which we'll also probably go into.
Barbara herself, it's a protected identity.
Our understanding is she's a Honduran citizen seeking asylum in the country and was pregnant during the lawsuit.
So she represents the children who would be deprived of U.S. citizenship under the administrations, under the executive order itself, if it went into effect.
Okay, so it traveled through a number of courts, but this particular case traveled through the District Court of New Hampshire.
And at that point, the judge heard it and effectively said that the executive order, which again we can go into, was unconstitutional and stated.
At that point, and this is quite interesting, the administration sought what's called cert before judgment.
So instead of what would be traditional, going to appealing and going to the circuit court directly, they went to the Supreme Court.
And they said this is an issue of such magnitude and importance, and it's been, you know, stayed or paused in other courts.
And so, even though the, as would normally be the case, the appeals court or the circuit court has not decided it, we want you, Supreme Court, to take it up and decide it.
And the Supreme Court then agreed to grant it.
It's a pretty rare procedural posture, although it's become in some ways more common, especially as the district court orders and stays have become more important and more prominent.
So, just to back it up a little, on January 20th, 2025, which was when actually the day Trump was sworn into office for his second term, he issued an executive order ending birthright citizenship, which is the right of automatic citizenship to most babies born in the country.
It was to take place 30 days from that order, so it was not retroactive.
This is kind of a point of confusion among a lot of folks.
The order itself would go into effect 30 days.
It would not affect those who were already born in the country.
But in any event, it was to go into effect at that point.
It was then challenged under the 14th Amendment.
The 14th Amendment has something which is called the citizenship clause, which is basically that folks receive citizenship if they're born in or subject, and this is the key subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
And this might be a good point to actually read the text of the 14th Amendment.
Always good to read the text of the Constitution.
Here it is: it's the 14th Amendment, Section 1, and then that first sentence, the first clause.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
So it's not controversial that being born in the United States, or at least not controversial to a certain extent, what's really being argued here is what subject to the jurisdiction thereof means.
And this is where we have the divide.
The Trump administration is saying that this order is entirely constitutional because subject to the jurisdiction thereof means that one's parents have allegiance to the United States.
So, and by allegiance to the United States, the Trump administration means that your parents were citizens.
Or legal permanent residence.
But for those whose parents are temporary visitors or undocumented immigrants, they're not here subject to the jurisdiction.
There's no allegiance there.
And so, therefore, those children, even if they're born in the United States, should not have automatic citizenship.
The other side says subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
No, all that means is you are subject to the laws of the United States.
So, when children are born in the United States, they and their parents, presumably, are subject to the laws of the United States and therefore.
They receive automatic citizenship.
So that's kind of the heart of the fight, though there are plenty of additional arguments on both sides, which I'm happy to explore either one by one or if we want to discuss some in particular.
Well, one in particular I want to discuss the president's argument.
He made his case in this case on his true social feed on Monday at about 6 45 a.m. Eastern.
This is what he wrote Birthright citizenship is not about rich people from China and the rest of the world who want their children and hundreds of thousands more for pay.
To ridiculously become citizens of the United States of America.
It is about the babies of slaves.
We are the only country in the world that dignifies this subject with even discussion.
Look at the dates of this long ago legislation, the exact end of the Civil War.
The world is getting rich selling citizenship to our country while at the same time laughing at how stupid our U.S. court system has become.
He adds, tariffs!
Dumb judges and justices will not a great country make, he quotes.
That the president's lawyers are going to be making today before the court?
There are about three or four arguments in there, and yes.
So, the first one I'd say is so everyone agrees on both sides that the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, which is what we've discussed, was passed in 1868 after the Civil War.
And it was in response to the Dred Scott decision, which I'm sure a lot of folks who are listening to this are aware of, which denied citizenship to black Americans effectively.
And so the impetus for the Citizenship Clause was to guarantee.
Citizenship to such persons.
So Trump is arguing that that was the point of the citizenship clause.
It was not to grant citizenship to temporary visitors or undocumented immigrants.
So that's a big point of his argument.
He also is claiming a policy argument in that post.
And that policy argument is the rest of the world doesn't have birthright citizenship.
And that is true.
The majority of countries do not have birthright citizenship.
Citizenship comes through the parents being citizens.
Or residents of some sort.
And so Trump is saying that this is ridiculous.
Anyone can come here, they can have a child, and that person becomes a citizen, whether their parents or ultimately the child are loyal to the United States.
And so, as a matter of policy, that's a big problem.
He also goes into the idea that this has been stretched and stretched.
And so it's a combination of kind of the idea of why this was passed.
It was not passed to grant citizenship to these folks.
And at the same time, it has all these policy problems.
Zach Shemtov is joining us to discuss the case this morning.
It's one of the big ones at the Supreme Court this term.
It's the birthright citizenship case.
If you have thoughts, if you have questions, a great time to call in would be now because the case begins in 25 minutes.
Democrats, it's 202 748 8000.
Republicans, 202 748 8001.
Independents, 202 748 8002.
And we'll continue monitoring the feeds from the White House.
And let you know if and when the president does make that trip down Constitution Avenue, up to Capitol Hill, across First Street, and to the Supreme Court.
He said he's going.
It's on his schedule.
We'll see if it happens.
And we will hear from, as we're waiting, Tim in Minnesota, Independent.
Tim, go ahead.
unidentified
Yeah, you know, I'm a little bit older.
I'm 67 now.
And I grew up thinking that, yeah, if you were born in the United States, you should be a citizen.
And over time, I guess I've become less of a liberal and more of a conservative.
And until.
Donald Trump came along and did what he did and said this executive order that he did in 2025, I guess.
I guess with finding out more of the details, I really struggle with people coming to the United States that aren't loyal to the United States and they just are, I guess, tourist birthrights.
Citizens, I've heard that term thrown around, and I struggle with that.
And this is a big decision.
I think that they need to control it a little bit more.
And if you're not loyal to the United States, then you shouldn't be a citizen of the United States.
And we have folks at SCOTUS blog attending oral arguments.
So we have called what's a view from the court after.
And so we'll be writing all about that.
I kind of wanted to address the call.
I know I've done this before on C SPAN and it may be getting kind of annoying, but I just want to distinguish between law and policy.
So the caller said, you know, like Trump said at the end of his post or the beginning of his post, that, you know, birthright citizenship is ridiculous.
Other countries do it differently.
This is not something which we should have as law.
That is a policy argument, and that is different from what the Constitution may or may not say.
So, I might disagree with something politically, but it doesn't mean that I have that position legally or that I'm right legally.
So, there is a difference here between what the 14th Amendment says or you think it might say and what you believe the best policy should be.
Zach Shemtob, we are seeing the motorcade come down the streets of Washington, D.C. and up towards Capitol Hill.
So we'll keep monitoring the various shots and show you as the president is indeed making his way in this historic visit to the Supreme Court to attend an oral argument live.
And we'll let you know what it looks like and sounds like when the president arrives at the Supreme Court as we hear from Pete in Texas, Democrat.
Pete, go ahead.
unidentified
Hi, good morning.
Appreciate you taking my call.
Yeah, I don't think this is an 80 20 issue.
I think this is a 100 0 issue.
And now, why I'm saying that is that, yeah, I agree with the administration that you just can't have anchor babies here.
You know, we have laws, you know, we're humane, we're very flexible, but I'm just a little disappointed that, you know, they take advantage of the system.
And you just can't come here on a temporary status and, you know, have kids and you get automatic.
You have to have, and I'm saying that because I'm an immigrant.
My parents came here back in the 60s.
I was born here.
So there's a legitimate way of doing this.
And people take advantage of it and not only take advantage of the system, but they take advantage of all the resources free education, free housing, free everything.
And so, yeah, I don't agree with the administration on everything, but immigration, yeah, we need to stop this.
American Citizen Rights00:14:36
unidentified
Otherwise, you know, we're going to be a bankrupt nation.
That was the scene from outside the Supreme Court.
So it appeared that the president's motorcade went around to one of those side entrances and not that main plaza outside the front would make sense, a more secure entrance for the president.
But that's where the motorcade stopped, moving around that corner on that street in between North Capitol Street or East Capitol Street in between the Supreme Court and the Library of Congress.
I could be wrong, but I don't see how that's quite possible, given this argument is likely to take an hour and a half, two hours, maybe more, potentially will be delayed.
And then the president will, you know, have to get up and you have all the security detail, et cetera.
So does that mean the president is going to get up?
At some point during the argument?
Is he going to have to cancel his Easter brunch?
Is it going to be a big rush?
So, even logistical issues here have now become a bit squared.
I know this doesn't happen often, but when the president comes to the United States Capitol, there's specific rooms that the president will go before visiting with members of the Senate or members of the House.
Is there sort of a standard operating procedure here when a president comes to the judicial branch?
Zachary Shemtob joining us from SCOTUS blog to talk about it.
And again, we are 15 minutes away from the scheduled start of this argument in the birthright citizenship case.
There is that main plaza, the one viewers are most used to seeing.
And you can see members of the public gathering.
Still there, and that's usually where the press gathers as well.
We'll hear from Julian in New Haven, Connecticut, Independent.
Julian, you're on with Zach Shemtob.
unidentified
Thank you.
Good morning.
Regarding birthright citizenship, there is a very, very unusual case going on right now in the Dominican Republic where their Supreme Court has declared not only Haitians, but Haitian descendants as far back as five generations to have their citizenship revoked.
Going back to the 14th Amendment, before the African slaves were granted an amnesty, which is what the 14th Amendment is, their status was cargo or property, which makes that last sentence in the 14th Amendment subject to the states thereof really, really interesting.
Issue when it comes to territories and how that's to be treated.
And in terms of the states, that would be a separate thing and has been treated separately, for better or worse, I would say worse, by the U.S. government.
So that deals with very different interests.
I want to speak to the, because the caller touched on the retroactivity point.
So this is the idea that you could actually take citizenship away from those, say, this order went into effect.
And could you go back and take citizenship away from folks not covered by the order?
For instance, individuals who were born in this country, but their parents were on student visas or et cetera.
And that raises a host of concerns, which the other side, the barber's side, actually brings up.
They basically say, well, even though the executive order isn't retroactive, it threatens that.
And why couldn't the president then, by the stroke of a pen, make it retroactive and deny all these people citizenship who are already citizens?
So that is something in the air.
And something that is a concern to a great deal of people.
I do think it raises all sorts of complicated due process and other constitutional concerns.
So I don't quite see it happening, even if the president wins in this case.
But that is certainly in the air.
And as the caller alluded to, it's something that's being dealt with in other areas.
But I don't see that as in play, at least at the moment.
And since we're talking about them, might as well mention another one.
This one's a few weeks away, but we just found out this morning that, according to Ed O'Keefe of CBS News, King Charles III, the King of the United Kingdom and Great Britain and Northern Ireland will address a joint meeting of Congress on Tuesday, April 28, 2026.
That is the announcement.
And so congressional correspondents will be busy that day as well.
But that is about a month away.
It is April 1st, and we've got plenty to talk about between this case.
The president's address tonight, the Artemis 2 launch, and we are 10 minutes away from the start of oral arguments.
This is John in Texas, Republican.
Good morning.
unidentified
Good morning.
I'm looking at it from a different angle.
If I was going to argue, I would talk to Chief Justice Roberts.
First question If a woman that's pregnant nine months breaks into your personal house and has her baby on your living room floor, Does that baby become a Roberts?
Is that under your jurisdiction, or are you going to call and have her removed because she does not belong in your house?
Well, this is America's house, not illegal immigrants' house.
To me, I lived in Texas and I saw a woman nine months pregnant, had her baby in the middle of the Rio Grande River.
They brought her to our side, took her to the emergency room.
That baby had several diseases and became an American citizen.
There's no way that the writers of the Constitution, the 14th Amendment, ever envisioned that that would happen so they could get citizenship.
I mean, I think there are all sorts of things that the founders and the folks who wrote the Constitution and the generation that it was written during didn't anticipate or even understand.
I don't think that necessarily means that changes the language, if one thinks that the language guarantees citizenship, Birthright citizenship.
So, again, I want to separate between these scenarios and what we might think are a problem as a matter of policy and what the 14th Amendment actually says itself.
And by saying that, I'm not taking a particular position.
I just want to untangle, we could bring up all sorts of scenarios on both sides, which we might say this is crazy.
This is totally politically problematic.
And what we're going to see at the Supreme Court is a focus less on that and much more, okay, what does the amendment say?
What was it meant to say?
How has it been understood?
What's the precedent supporting it or not, et cetera?
So, how it begins is, as we discussed a little, the advocates go up and then they make their opening statement effectively, and then the justices ask in order of seniority.
And then after that round, there's kind of a free for all where the justices ask their questions in the order they so desire.
I think at the end of the day, that it's very clear certain justices are going to vote in favor of recognizing continuing birthright citizenship, and that is, you know, Justice Kagan.
Jackson and Sotomayor.
I think on the other side, I would say Justices Alito and Thomas are either more on the fence or perhaps more inclined to vote with the administration.
So that leaves kind of the middle of the court.
Justice Barrett will be someone to watch.
During the oral argument in a predecessor case to this one, she indicated that she thinks the 14th Amendment recognizes birthright citizenship.
So she seemed to be against the administration.
In that regard.
So it'll be interesting to see if she continues that line of questioning.
Gorsuch also, I think, has indicated in the past that he is sympathetic to recognizing birthright citizenship.
We don't know the chief's stance, but he's more of an institutionalist and a moderate.
So that, again, may indicate here against the administration, as was the case in tariffs and Kavanaugh, we're not sure.
So I think as it stands now, the Supreme Court aficionados or Supreme Court watchers think that the administration is likely to lose this case.
And the justices' questions are more likely to reflect that.
And it's just a question of, okay, well, how much will they lose by?
But you never know until you hear arguments, and then you never know until the actual opinion is announced.
So you have, by tradition, even though he's not the most senior, the chief is always the most senior, but they let Justice Thomas go first.
I think Justice Thomas may not be a good gauge because I think he's the most likely to vote with the administration.
So, I don't know how much we'll be able to get from that.
But then, when it gets to the chief and Justice Alito, that'll be a real tell to see how tough their questions are to the advocates, to the ACLU lawyer.
And if they're tough and they seem questioning different aspects of birthright citizenship, that may indicate that, oh, maybe they're more likely to side with the administration here.
So, I think the real tells will be after Justice Thomas when it gets to Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Alito, and then eventually to Kavanaugh and Barrett.
I mean, again, more policy oriented or more on policy than necessarily the meaning of the amendment.
That said, it also shows the value of or that people place on American citizenship, that they want to go through all these different ways to try and become a citizen.
Yes, it does happen on occasion where, you know, for any reason, something's going on with the justices, there's some security concern, you know, there's some disruption up front where arguments can be delayed.
It's happened before.
It will happen again.
My understanding from our folks out there is that security right now is obviously incredibly tight and difficult to get in.
And so I'd imagine just in terms of letting everyone into the courtroom and then getting through security is going to be logistically more complicated than usual.
I imagine that view from the courtroom reporter is going to be particularly interesting today, a day we really wish that we had cameras in the courtroom.
The best we can give you is live oral arguments, and we're expecting them to begin in just a few minutes.
Stay with us here on C SPAN.
Sights and sounds as well from the plaza out front of the Supreme Court as we hear from Robert in Arizona.
Okay, so Wong Kim Ark is probably the most important precedent, and it will be discussed quite a bit during this case.
The Supreme Court sided with Wang Kim Ark.
Wang Kim Ark himself was born in San Francisco, I believe, to parents who were Chinese.
He then left the country, attempted to come back into the country after being abroad for a bit, and he was denied entry under the Chinese Exclusion Act, which banned Chinese folks who effectively weren't citizens from the United States.
And he said, I'm a citizen.
This is not right.
He then sued, you know, ultimately it went to the Supreme Court, and the court found that Wong Kim Ark was indeed a U.S. citizen because he had been born in the United States.
And the court said that, you know, it affirmed the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens.
So in this very important case, the court seemed to recognize explicitly birthright citizenship.
Administration points out that there's certain language in the case, and it was true, as for one Kim Ark, that he was born to resident aliens.
And so the Trump administration says listen, when it comes to legal permanent residents, they're covered.