Speaking at a news conference at the White House, Mr. Trump also said that he believes the Iranians are negotiating "in good faith" amid a renewed diplomatic push to strike a deal that would stop the fighting and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The president has given the Iranians until 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday to reach an agreement on opening the strait before targeting power plants and infrastructure.

Mr. Trump said the effort to locate the downed airmen was "one of the largest, most complex, most harrowing combat searches — I guess you would call it a search and rescue mission — ever attempted by the military."

The American F-15E fighter jet was shot down by Iranian fire on Friday. The plane's pilot was located and rescued that same day, but the second crew member, a weapon systems officer, remained missing in Iran's mountainous terrain. The president announced early Sunday morning that the weapon systems officer had also been rescued.

The operation involved more than 150 planes and more than 200 munitions, CBS News reported earlier Monday. The stranded officer had only a handgun to defend himself.

Joined at the White House by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Mr. Trump said he "ordered the U.S. armed forces to do whatever was necessary to bring our brave warriors back home" soon after the jet was shot down. He revealed that the F-15 was brought down by a "handheld shoulder missile, [a] heat-seeking missile."

The president said it was a "risky decision" to attempt to recover the airmen, since the U.S. could have ended up with "100 dead as opposed to one or two." He later said hundreds of Americans were involved in the operation.

"It's a hard decision to make, but in the United States military, we leave no American behind. We don't do it," he said. 

The president said the pilot of the fighter jet was located in the first wave of search-and-rescue operations and picked up by a U.S. helicopter crew that "faced gunfire at very close range." 

Mr. Trump said the second crew member was injured "quite badly" and stranded in an area "teaming with terrorists," far from the pilot's location. He said the airman followed his training and began climbing toward a higher altitude to evade capture, scaling cliff faces, treating his own wounds and contacting U.S. forces to transmit his location. 

Hegseth said when the airman was able to access his emergency transponder, "his first message was simple and it was powerful — he sent a message, 'God is good.'"

The president said, "In a breathtaking show of skill and precision, lethality and force, America's military descended on the area … engaged the enemy, rescued the stranded officer, destroyed all threats and exited Iranian territory while taking no casualties of any kind."

Mr. Trump said the officer "had evaded capture on the ground in Iran for almost 48 hours. That's a long time when you're in tough shape and when you're bleeding."

The president said the large number of forces involved in the operation was meant, in part, to throw the Iranians off the trail of the officer's trail.

"We wanted to have them think he was in a different location, because they had a vast military force out there. Thousands, thousands of people were looking," he said. "So we wanted them to look in different areas. So we were scattered all over, like we were right on top of them. We had seven different locations where they thought — and they were very confused — they said, 'Well, wait a minute, they've got groups here.'"

Ratcliffe, the CIA chief, called the challenge of the search-and-rescue operation "comparable to hunting for a single grain of sand in the middle of a desert." He said it was also a "race against the clock," making it critical to locate the American aviator as soon as possible. He said for that reason, the CIA launched a "deception campaign to confuse the Iranians who were desperately hunting for our airman."

"On Saturday morning, we achieved our primary objective by finding and providing confirmation that one of America's best and bravest was alive and concealed in a mountain crevice, still invisible to the enemy, but not to the CIA," Ratcliffe said. "That confirmation was relayed by Secretary Hegseth to the president, and the operation quickly moved to the execution phase."

Hegseth said "the United States military will go anywhere at any time to protect our own and complete the mission." He added that "we flew for seven hours in daylight over Iran to get the first pilot, and we flew seven hours in the middle of the night to get the second."

"And Iran did nothing about it," Hegseth said. 

Caine, the Joint Chiefs chairman, said the mission was "incredibly dangerous" and detailed a firefight that preceded the rescue of the downed pilot. He said drones, A-10 jets and other aircraft were "violently suppressing and engaging the enemy in a close-in gunfight to keep them away from the front-seater and allow the pickup force to get into the objective area."

A pilot of one of the A-10s took fire and "continued to fight, continued the mission, and then upon exit, flew his aircraft into another country and determined that the airplane was not landable," Caine said. The A-10 pilot "made the decision to eject over friendly territory, and was quickly and safely recovered," the chairman said.

Caine said the rescue operations showed that "the United States of America will recover our war fighters anywhere in the world, under any conditions, when we want to. We will always bring overwhelming skill and firepower."

What comes next in Iran

On Sunday, the president threatened to destroy Iranian power plants and other civilian infrastructure if a deal isn't reached to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Mr. Trump extended the deadline until Tuesday at 8 p.m. ET, after vowing that "Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran."

The president said Monday at the White House that "the entire country could be taken out in one night, and that night might be tomorrow night."

When asked about Tuesday's deadline by CBS News' Weijia Jiang, Mr. Trump said that "we have to have a deal that's acceptable to me, and part of that deal is going to be, we want free traffic of oil and everything else."

"We have a plan, because of the power of our military, where every bridge in Iran will be decimated by 12 o'clock tomorrow night. Where every power plant in Iran will be out of business, burning, exploding and never to be used again — I mean complete demolition — by 12 o'clock, and it will happen over a period of four hours, if we want it to," Mr. Trump said. "We don't want that to happen."

A diplomatic effort is underway to avoid the possible major escalation. The president is considering, among other ideas, a Pakistani proposal for a 45-day ceasefire that would involve the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

Asked about the negotiations and a possible pause in the fighting, Mr. Trump said he couldn't comment on the possibility of a ceasefire, but he said "we have an active, willing participant on the other side."

"They would like to be able to make a deal," he said. 

When asked to clarify his mixed messages on how long the war with Iran will continue, Mr. Trump said, "I can't tell you, I don't know."

"It depends what they do. This is a critical period," Mr. Trump said. "They have til tomorrow. Now we'll see what happens. I can tell you, they're negotiating, we think, in good faith."

"We have rescued the seriously wounded, and really brave, F-15 Crew Member/Officer, from deep inside the mountains of Iran," President Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Sunday, calling him "a highly respected Colonel." 

Mr. Trump said the pilot was rescued "in broad daylight" after U.S. forces spent "seven hours over Iran." He plans to share more about the operation at a news conference on Monday, according to the post.

The president originally confirmed the crew member's rescue in a Truth Social post overnight.

"WE GOT HIM!" he wrote in the post. "My fellow Americans, over the past several hours, the United States Military pulled off one of the most daring Search and Rescue Operations in U.S. History, for one of our incredible Crew Member Officers, who also happens to be a highly respected Colonel, and who I am thrilled to let you know is now SAFE and SOUND!"

Mr. Trump said that the rescued officer had "sustained injuries, but he will be just fine."

Of the rescue operation, the president said that "at my direction, the U.S. Military sent dozens of aircraft, armed with the most lethal weapons in the World, to retrieve him."

U.S. officials had previously told CBS News the jet was carrying a two-person crew when it was downed by Iranian forces Friday. 

Iranian Revolutionary Guards took credit for the strike, alleging the jet was brought down in southwestern Iran Friday morning. Photos of debris that Iranian media said showed the wreckage of the downed U.S. fighter jet appeared consistent with an American F-15, two weapons experts told CBS News.

The pilot of the F-15E had safely ejected and was rescued by two military helicopters, U.S. officials earlier said, but the second crew member, a weapons system officer, had remained missing.

During Friday's recovery efforts, a U.S. chopper carrying the rescued pilot was struck by small arms fire, wounding crew members on board, U.S. officials said, but the helicopter landed safely.

An A-10 Thunderbolt that was part of Friday's search mission took fire and was damaged. The Warthog's pilot ejected over the Persian Gulf and was successfully recovered, U.S. officials said.

Mr. Trump on Friday put some other operations on pause in Iran to prioritize the search and rescue, directing hundreds of special operations forces to the effort, zeroing in on the stranded crew member's beacon.   

A U.S. official and a White House official confirmed to CBS News that U.S. commandos recovered the missing crew member in a complex operation that involved dozens of special forces personnel, and several dozen warplanes and helicopters. The news was first reported by the New York Times.

The rescued officer was flown to Kuwait to receive treatment for his injuries, the two officials said.

The harrowing military operation utilized bombs and weapons fire to keep Iranian troops away from where the missing officer was believed to be hiding, the two officials said. While stranded, he had only a handgun to defend himself, the two officials disclosed. 

Two transport planes tasked with flying out rescue crews were unable to take off from a remote base in Iran. Those planes were demolished to keep them from being captured by the enemy, the officials said, and the commandos flew out on three extra aircraft that were sent in to fetch them. 

The three rescue planes flew out of Iran to Kuwait, each just a short distance behind each other, the officials disclosed. The mission was completed just before midnight, with all U.S. forces out of enemy airspace.   

The CIA was deeply involved in the rescue mission, a senior Trump administration official told CBS News on Sunday.

Before locating the airman, the CIA launched a deception campaign, spreading word inside Iran that U.S. forces had already found him and were moving him on the ground for exfiltration out of the country.

While the deception operation was ongoing, the agency used its capabilities to track the crew member in a mountain crevice, the official said. 

The CIA shared the crew member's exact location with the Pentagon and the White House, the official said. The president ordered an immediate rescue mission, with the CIA continuing to provide real-time information.

The downing of the F-15E fighter jet marks the first time a U.S. fighter jet has been shot down in combat in over 20 years, retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Houston Cantwell, a former F-16 fighter pilot, told The Associated Press. 

At least four U.S. fighter jets have been shot down since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, but three of those were in a friendly-fire incident, the Pentagon said. On March 1, three American F-15s were "mistakenly shot down by Kuwaiti air defenses," U.S. Central Command said at the time, and there were no casualties from that incident. 

Until Sunday's announcement, Mr. Trump had been mostly silent on the subject of the search, telling The Independent in a phone interview Friday that he couldn't comment on what he might do if the crew member were captured by Iran. 

"Well, I can't comment on it because — we hope that's not going to happen," Mr. Trump said.

In his social media post Sunday, Mr. Trump said the White House's silence was to protect the missing officer, saying the U.S. military "did not confirm" Friday's rescue of the F-15E's pilot "because we did not want to jeopardize our second rescue operation."  

Mr. Trump on Saturday also issued another warning to Iran regarding its control over the Strait of Hormuz, telling the Iranian regime it had 48 hours to reopen the crucial waterway or "all Hell will reign [sic] down on them."

Since the war began, the virtual closure of the strait — which sees about 20% of all global oil traffic — has caused fuel prices to skyrocket worldwide. 

The president's memo directs DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought to "use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS." It does not list out the specific funding sources that DHS plans to tap, or the exact legal justification for moving those funds around.

"This callous treatment of DHS employees must end in order to ensure that America is not susceptible to security threats and maintains readiness to respond to emergencies," he wrote, blaming Democrats for the shutdown. "As President of the United States, I have determined that these circumstances constitute an emergency situation compromising the Nation's security."

Mr. Trump previewed the move on Thursday, writing on social media that he will "soon sign an order to pay ALL of the incredible employees at the Department of Homeland Security."

The memo estimates that over 35,000 DHS employees haven't been paid, including civilian Coast Guard employees and staff at the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency.

Other DHS staff have received paychecks as the Trump administration has attempted to move money around, including Secret Service agents and active-duty Coast Guard personnel.

Law enforcement officers at two immigration-focused agencies — Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection — have been paid through funding in last year's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Last week, Mr. Trump directed Transportation Security Administration officers to be paid through similar means, after absences by TSA officers led to hourslong airport lines.

DHS has been shut down since mid-February due to a dispute over immigration enforcement policy. Following the deadly shooting of two Americans by immigration agents in Minneapolis earlier this year, congressional Democrats have opposed funding ICE and CBP without policy changes, but the two parties have been unable to reach an agreement on reforms.

A path forward has emerged over the last week, after Senate Democrats and Republicans approved a bill to fund the bulk of DHS while carving out ICE and parts of CBP, allowing most of the agency to reopen. 

House Republicans initially rejected that plan, but earlier this week, GOP leadership in both chambers indicated they plan to pass most DHS funding through that route. Then, they plan to fund the rest of DHS — ICE and CBP — through the Senate's reconciliation process, which allows spending bills to be passed with a simple majority without Democratic support.

The House has not yet taken action on the Senate's bill to fund most of DHS.

The panel sent letters on Friday to: White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, Trump administration border czar Tom Homan, former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, former Customs and Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino, former Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin, former Homeland Security adviser Corey Lewandowski, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons, and Customs and Border Patrol Commissioner Rodney Scott.

"I established the Illinois Accountability Commission to preserve the truth and document how Donald Trump and his accomplices violated the rights of Illinoisans and terrorized our communities during Operation Midway Blitz. These officials should answer directly to the people of Illinois for the chaos and violence they unleashed," Pritzker said in a statement. "Regardless of whether these officials are still in their roles or not, the people of Illinois demand accountability from them all."

The governor created the Illinois Accountability Commission in October, telling CBS News at the time it would serve as a permanent record of alleged civil rights abuses by federal agents in Chicago. 

Pritzker told CBS News the state would document "unlawful attacks" by ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers under Operation Midway Blitz. 

"They are attacking people on the ground — ICE, CBP — going after people just because they're Brown or Black," Pritzker said in October. "No one above them is holding them responsible. Greg Bovino, who is running the operation in Chicago, isn't holding them accountable. No one is. So we're going to have to keep a record." 

Bovino and many of the Border Patrol officers under his command left Chicago in November, and Operation Midway Blitz and the Trump administration's enhanced immigration operations in the area have largely wound down since then.

Pritzker's office said hundreds of videos and firsthand accounts of the immigration crackdown already had been collected in October when the commission was launched and will be preserved for use in future legal proceedings. 

"These people need to be held accountable," he said. "And they will be — by the judiciary now, and by Congress or the next administration later." 

Former Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Ruben Castillo, is the commission's chair and will lead two public hearings on April 27 and April 28 in downtown Chicago to seek answers about the Trump administration's tactics during Operation Midway Blitz.

"The people of Illinois deserve to know how this operation was planned, authorized, and carried out—and to identify who was responsible for the decisions that led to its implementation in our state," Castillo said in a statement. "The Commission's work seeks to determine who authorized these actions, what safeguards were in place to protect Illinois residents, and what accountability mechanisms exist when federal operations harm communities."

Up to 20 members of the public will be invited to speak for up to two minutes each at the hearings. Anyone interested in speaking at the hearings can fill out and submit an interest form online between April 20 and April 23.

If officials from the Trump administration decline to attend the hearings, it's unclear who else is expected to testify.

A White House spokesperson blasted the request for Trump administration testimony at the hearings as a "political stunt," calling Pritzker "a total slob."

"If this slob spent half as much time addressing crime and public safety concerns in Chicago as he did pandering to radical leftists, Chicagoans would be much safer. The Trump Administration, and our heroic ICE officers, will unapologetically remove dangerous criminal illegal aliens from American streets whether Pritzker likes it or not," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement.

The F-15E is flown by a two-member crew, and the search for the second crew member, a weapons system officer, is continuing, two U.S. officials said. 

The jet was shot down by Iranian forces, the officials said, and the combat rescue mission ensued shortly after. An A-10 Warthog was part of the search and rescue mission when it took fire and was damaged. The Warthog pilot ejected over the Persian Gulf and was successfully recovered, according to the officials.

Two helicopters also took part in the search and rescue mission and successfully retrieved the F-15E pilot who had ejected, officials said. The helicopter carrying the recovered pilot was hit by small arms fire, wounding crew members on board, according to the officials, who said the helicopter landed safely. All service members are receiving initial medical treatment and will be transported for further medical care.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard claimed it shot down a U.S. fighter jet over the middle of the country Friday morning. Photos and video circulating on social media and shared by Iranian state news outlets suggested at least one U.S. C-130 aircraft and two Black Hawk helicopters were spotted flying low over central and southwest Iran, in what was described as an effort to locate and recover the crew.

CBS News reported earlier this week that the U.S. military had lost at least 16 MQ-9 Reaper drones over Iran since the war began, and three U.S. F-15 fighter jets were shot down over Kuwait in a "friendly fire incident" early in the conflict, but there were no casualties.

The downing of the jet Friday comes after repeated assertions by President Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and military commanders of U.S. air superiority that largely deprived Iran of attack capabilities and air defenses during the war.

"Now in our fifth week of the campaign, it is my operational assessment that we are making undeniable progress. We don't see their navy sailing. We don't see their aircraft flying, and their air and missile defense systems have largely been destroyed," CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper said Thursday.

A local affiliate of Iran's state TV channel said Friday a prize was being offered for anyone able to "capture the enemy pilot or pilots alive and hand them over to the police." 

The Associated Press said the TV broadcast included a written message urging viewers to shoot at any U.S. aircraft seen flying overhead. 

The lawsuit, led by California, was filed with the U.S. district court in Massachusetts. It asserts that neither the Constitution nor any federal law gives the president the power to mandate widespread changes to states' electoral systems or voting procedures.

The measure, they said, "transgress Plaintiff States' constitutional power to prescribe the time, place, and manner of federal elections" and seeks to "amend and dictate election law by fiat based on the President's whims." 

The executive order at the center of the challenge was signed by Mr. Trump on Tuesday, months before the November midterm elections, and lays out new requirements related to mail voting. The directive calls for the Department of Homeland Security to compile "State Citizenship Lists" of U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in federal elections and requires the U.S. Postal Service to send mail or absentee ballots only to voters on each state's list.

Mr. Trump's measure also lays out specific requirements for mail ballot envelopes, including requiring them to bear a unique barcode for tracking. States and localities that don't comply with the executive order are at risk of losing federal funding. 

The directive has already been challenged by a coalition of major Democratic groups, which accused Mr. Trump of attempting to rewrite election rules for partisan gain.

In the lawsuit, the states warned that the president's order "violates bedrock principles of federalism and separation of powers." 

"Each Plaintiff State has duly enacted laws governing voter rolls and mail voting that are, where applicable, consistent with statutory requirements set forth by Congress," they wrote. "The EO disregards States' inherent sovereignty and attempts to arrogate to the President the States' and Congress's constitutional power to regulate federal elections."

Mr. Trump has long railed against mail voting, claiming that the method is "cheating" and compromises election integrity. But instances of mail-voting fraud are rare, and there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. 

The president himself has taken advantage of voting by mail, casting a mail ballot in a special election last month for a Florida state House seat. First lady Melania Trump and his son Barron Trump also voted by mail, according to records from the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections.

The Constitution's Elections Clause gives states the power to set the "times, places and manner" of federal elections, and Congress also has the authority to pass election regulations. While Mr. Trump often accuses Democratic states of allowing noncitizens to cast ballots in federal elections, it is a federal crime to do so. Instances of noncitizen voting are rare. 

The president's executive order comes as he has pressured the Senate to pass the SAVE America Act, which would require Americans to show proof of citizenship in person to register to vote in federal elections and implement photo ID requirements for voting. The House approved the measure in February, but it's unlikely to clear the GOP-led Senate, where most legislation requires 60 votes to advance.

Mr. Trump signed another election-related executive order last year, which sought to overhaul U.S. elections and require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, but key provisions have been blocked in court.

"The Government's arguments do not come close to convincing the Court that a different outcome is warranted," wrote Chief Judge for the District of Columbia James Boasberg.

In January, Powell revealed that the Federal Reserve had received grand jury subpoenas from the Justice Department as part of an ongoing criminal investigation into him.

The subpoenas threatened a criminal indictment related to Powell's testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in June 2025, according to Powell. The chairman — who has drawn President Trump's ire for declining to rapidly slash interest rates — said the probe centered on his comments about a years-long renovation project at the Federal Reserve's office buildings. The investigation has not resulted in any criminal charges.

In sealed proceedings, lawyers for the Federal Reserve asked Boasberg to quash them. Boasberg granted the request and unsealed his decision last month, prompting U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro to accuse him of being an "activist judge" whose decision was "untethered to the law."

The government is both appealing the ruling and filed a separate motion asking Boasberg to reconsider his decision.

Salah Sarsour, a Palestinian-born legal permanent resident of the United States, was taken into custody by nearly a dozen U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who surrounded his car on Monday in Milwaukee after he left his home, according to the Islamic Society of Milwaukee.

Supporters called for his immediate release on Thursday. His attorneys said he was detained on the grounds that he is a foreign policy threat, a claim they say has no merit.

Instead, they believe Sarsour, 53, was targeted for speaking out against Israel and for a conviction as a minor by Israeli military courts, which have faced scrutiny over allegations of limited due process and high conviction rates of Palestinians. Israel rejects those claims. The offenses included allegedly throwing rocks at Israeli officers, according to attorney Munjed Ahmad.

"Our government should not be doing the bidding of a foreign government," Ahmad said of Israel. "There's no question in my mind is that this is to stifle the discourse on the Palestinian narrative."

Attorneys said Sarsour, born in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, has no criminal record in the U.S., where he has lived for more than 30 years. They said the U.S. government has known about Sarsour's conviction in Israel since he came to the U.S. in 1993.

An email message left Thursday for ICE and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security was not immediately returned.

Sarsour's attorneys have likened the case to that of Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student activist who faces deportation because the federal government said he was a foreign policy threat.

Sarsour has been the board president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, the largest Islamic organization in the state, for five years. His attorneys say he holds a green card and lives just outside Milwaukee. His wife and four adult children are U.S. citizens.

At a crowded news conference, boisterous supporters chanted to free Sarsour, recounting his advocacy for those in need. Several recalled Sarsour's stories about his childhood, including allegations of inhumane treatment while being detained by Israelis.

"He was targeted because of one thing, because he dared stand up to the Israeli army," Othman Atta, one of Sarsour's attorneys, told the crowd. "And he was not a U.S. citizen."

A diverse group of religious leaders in attendance called Sarsour a valuable community member.

"This appears to be just the latest example of how this administration seeks to silence opposition and intimidate those who speak and act differently," said the Rev. Paul D. Erickson, bishop of the Greater Milwaukee Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

Sarsour's arrest also prompted outcry from elected officials, including Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson, who called it "an outrage."

"He is a legal permanent resident. There is no substantive evidence he has done anything wrong," Johnson said Thursday in a post on X. "This is another example of overreach and harm from the U.S. immigration authorities."

Sarsour is being held at a county jail in Indiana. His attorneys have filed a petition seeking his release.

"He is ready to fight tooth and nail to make sure that he's not drug through the mud," Ahmad said. "He wants to stay in this country."

Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who heads the Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services USA, told CBS News' Ed O'Keefe in an interview that will broadcast Sunday on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" that the war is likely not justified under the Just War Theory. 

One of the tenets of Just War Theory, as articulated by St. Augustine, is that war should only be a last resort "in order that peace may be obtained" and not preemptive. 

"The Lord Jesus certainly brought a message of peace and also, I think war is always a last resort," Broglio said. He added that the Trump administration "may have information that led them to think that that was the only choice they had. I'm not making a judgment about that, because I really don't know. But I do think that it's hard to cast this war, you know, as something that would be sponsored by the Lord."

Asked by O'Keefe about rhetoric from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has invoked Jesus' name and called for prayers for service members in relation to the war with Iran, Broglio said casting the war as something that Jesus would justify is "a little bit problematic."

"I would line myself up with Pope Leo, who has been urging for negotiation," Broglio said. 

Pope Leo XIV, the first American pope, has urged President Trump and other leaders to find ways to reduce the violence in the Middle East and find an "off-ramp" in the war with Iran. 

At the individual level, Broglio counseled Catholic service members to "do as little harm as you can, and to try and preserve innocent lives."

Broglio said that because of the way conscientious objection is set up in the U.S. military, "you cannot object to a specific war or a specific action, you can only object to, 'I'm opposed to war.'" He said how a service member conducts themselves "depends on where you are in the chain of command."

"The question might be, would, you know, would generals or admirals have space to perhaps, say, 'can we look at this a different way?'" Broglio said. "But having spoken to some of them too, they're also in the same dilemma."

Broglio said he and his fellow chaplains are spending more time working on questions of "moral injury," or concerns among service members that they may need to seek forgiveness for the violence they carry out.

"Even if you obey a legitimate command, but you have to kill someone, that's going to leave some traces in, you know, in your heart or on your soul," he said. "We've tried to provide structures and help to people in that situation, to try and help them heal from those situations." 

The president confirmed the move in a post on Truth Social on Thursday afternoon, saying Bondi will move to a role in the private sector.

"Pam Bondi is a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year," he wrote. "We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future, and our Deputy Attorney General, and a very talented and respected Legal Mind, Todd Blanche, will step in to serve as Acting Attorney General."

In a post on X several hours later, Bondi wrote: "Over the next month I will be working tirelessly to transition the office of Attorney General to the amazing Todd Blanche before moving to an important private sector role I am thrilled about, and where I will continue fighting for President Trump and this Administration."

The president's support for Bondi had been eroding for months, with early missteps in her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files turning into a growing political liability, even among some of Mr. Trump's most loyal supporters, according to two sources familiar with the matter. Behind the scenes, the president increasingly vented frustration with Bondi's performance, particularly her inability to serve as an effective communicator and television surrogate — roles he had expected her to excel at.

In recent days, those concerns reached a breaking point. Bondi made a sustained effort this week to salvage her position, directly appealing to the president himself and his closest advisers to remain in the Cabinet. While the president sent mixed signals in private, he continued to publicly praise her loyalty — a contrast that underscored the uncertainty surrounding her standing.

When news of her firing broke, Bondi was in Florida on a previously scheduled trip.

Two administration officials said the president called Blanche and informed him that he would become acting attorney general. The congratulatory phone call lasted a few minutes, the officials said.

In a post on X, Blanche wrote that Bondi "led this Department with strength and conviction and I'm grateful for her leadership and friendship." 

"Thank you to President Trump for the trust and the opportunity to serve as Acting Attorney General," he wrote. "We will continue backing the blue, enforcing the law, and doing everything in our power to keep America safe."

Advisers close to the president considered the idea of moving Bondi to another senior role in the administration, including director of national intelligence, according to sources familiar with the matter. But Mr. Trump has told staff he wants Tulsi Gabbard to stay in that position.

White House officials have discussed several possibilities for Bondi's permanent replacement, but Lee Zeldin, the Senate-confirmed administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, is the likely pick, sources said Thursday. Mr. Trump met with Zeldin on Tuesday.

Zeldin, a former congressman, has very little legal experience, and that could cause a crisis of confidence at the department among both career and politically appointed officials. He has worked as a military prosecutor in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General's Corps, but hasn't been a traditional prosecutor. 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley said in a statement that the panel stands "ready to advance President Trump's next Attorney General nominee," and thanked Bondi for her service.

"Under her leadership, this Justice Department has been more responsive to my congressional oversight requests than any prior administration I've worked with — Republican or Democrat — and I expect that reputation to continue under Bondi's successor," he said.

Trump and Bondi

The president is fond of Bondi, and expresses personal affection for her in private conversations, multiple sources said earlier this week. She defended Mr. Trump as a private attorney during his first impeachment, and was viewed as a politically loyal ally as the nation's chief law enforcement officer. She openly suggested that attorneys who work in the department work for Mr. Trump — a claim some career lawyers said was at odds with their constitutional duty.

Although Mr. Trump has often expressed his affection for her, he has grown frustrated with the lack of progress in carrying out his agenda. Department officials have pursued a wide variety of criminal investigations into Mr. Trump's perceived political opponents, but most of the cases to date have not proven successful.

A federal judge dismissed indictments last fall against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James after finding the U.S. attorney who brought the charges was unlawfully appointed. Probes into Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff, Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell and Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook have not resulted in charges to date.

Efforts to investigate Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell and six congressional Democrats who posted a video urging military members to defy unlawful orders have also faltered, with a federal judge quashing the subpoenas into Powell and a grand jury unanimously rejecting criminal charges against the lawmakers.

Mr. Trump has felt frustrated that there haven't been more indictments and arrests, sources said, even as efforts to prosecute former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson and former CIA Director John Brennan are looming. 

Bondi had the U.S. attorney overseeing the Brennan case come to Washington, D.C., to answer questions about why the case hadn't been progressing more quickly, sources said. Jason Quiñones, whose district is in southern Florida, had meetings this week at the Justice Department.

Some of Bondi's allies believe that the lack of prosecutions is attributable to Blanche, who has not pushed them too hard amid political concerns and worries about his future after his Justice Department career.

Recently, the Justice Department hung a large banner outside its headquarters with Mr. Trump's image, in what some current and former DOJ employees saw as a symbol of Bondi's unwavering loyalty to the president and the oversized role that the White House now plays in driving the department's criminal and civil enforcement priorities.

Bondi's tenure

Under Bondi's leadership, the Justice Department has undergone a shift, both in its priorities and in its staffing. Thousands of lawyers and agents have departed due to firings, early retirements, buy-outs and voluntary departures. 

Most employees who were fired worked on issues that were disfavored by Mr. Trump and his allies — including prosecutors and FBI agents who were involved in probes into Mr. Trump over his retention of classified records and efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. 

From her first day in office, she set a tone that was different from that of her predecessors. 

She issued directives that included everything from threatening to discipline or fire lawyers who refused to sign certain legal briefs, to launching the creation of a Weaponization Working Group. The team was tasked with rooting out alleged wrongdoing by DOJ officials under the Biden administration.

The department also dismantled its Public Integrity Section, which was tasked with prosecuting public corruption, and greatly scaled back its focus on pursuing white-collar crime in favor of making immigration and narco-trafficking the priority.

One of the biggest shifts at the department observed by DOJ employees has been the erosion of traditional guardrails that were installed after the Watergate scandal that were designed to insulate the department's investigations from political interference by the White House.

The breakdown of those traditional norms is largely the driving force behind why some career lawyers at the department left for the private sector.

Shortfalls in both staffing levels and experience in U.S. attorneys' offices nationwide led to government lawyers being held in contempt, and other judges launching contempt inquiries over the Justice Department defying court orders.

"Pam Bondi took a sledgehammer to the Justice Department and its workforce," said Stacey Young, a former Justice Department attorney who founded and leads the nonprofit advocacy group Justice Connection.

"DOJ's independence, integrity, and workforce have degraded more under her leadership than at any other time during the department's 155-year history. What she destroyed in a year could take decades to rebuild," she said.

Bondi was one of just a handful of women to serve as U.S. attorney general, preceded by Janet Reno during the Clinton administration and Loretta Lynch during the Obama administration.

Mr. Trump chose Bondi, who previously served as Florida's attorney general, after former Rep. Matt Gaetz withdrew himself from consideration for the post amid controversy over allegations of drug use and accusations of sexual misconduct involving an underaged girl. 

"For too long, the partisan Department of Justice has been weaponized against me and other Republicans," Mr. Trump said in his statement announcing Bondi as his nominee. "Not anymore."

He has said she was "tough on crime" during her eight years as Florida's attorney general. He called her "fantastic" after argumentative exchanges in mid-February with Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee about how the administration handled the release of files related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Mr. Trump backed her last year even after she was criticized for the handling of its release. Soon after taking office, she publicly pledged to provide flight logs, names of those tied to Epstein and other evidence, only to later shift gears and declare there was no incriminating list of clients.

The controversy led Congress to eventually pass a bill compelling the Justice Department to release all of its investigative files on Epstein, some of which contained salacious and unproven allegations against Mr. Trump.

Last July, Bondi clashed with former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino over the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files review.

The Justice Department has continued to face pressure and criticism over omissions, improper redactions and the inadvertent release of victims' names. 

In announcing the final release of Epstein-related records, it was Blanche, not Bondi, who held a news conference with reporters on the department's final rollout of documents.

Bondi has since been subpoenaed to testify before a House panel on April 14, and has sought to avoid it by voluntarily sitting down with lawmakers to answer any of their questions.

Mr. Trump repeatedly defended Bondi, dismissing reporters' questions by saying she was doing a "very good job."

He also pressed the department to focus its attention on other key areas, including illegal immigration, countering progressive movements such as antifa and combatting fraud against the government — all issues that Bondi has prioritized during her tenure.

Last year, she ordered the FBI to compile a list of nonprofit groups that might be suspected of funding domestic terrorism, and the FBI and the IRS Criminal Investigation are now partnering up to carry out that directive.

The department has also rigorously defended the Trump administration's mass deportation and detention policies. 

Two federal appellate courts in recent weeks have supported the administration's position that immigrants who came into the country without admission and inspection can be detained without bond, even if they have been living here for years.

Bondi was widely liked among her staff and other political appointees in the administration. A dog lover, she has championed animal welfare issues and several of her close staff have also recently adopted dogs rescued from a breeder in a criminal case in Texas.

Among career staff, however, she was viewed as out of touch, tone-deaf and politically loyal to the president alone.

On the day staff at the Public Integrity Section learned their office would be gutted, for instance, the only communication they received from Bondi's office was a memo decrying the use of paper straws and directing all employees to stop using them.

Sources told CBS News that Bondi's dismissal comes amid the president's dissatisfaction with how aggressively she pursued his priorities, including prosecutions of his perceived political enemies.

During Bondi's time leading the Justice Department, federal prosecutors did pursue criminal investigations into Mr. Trump's perceived adversaries, including former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Leticia James, but both criminal cases were dismissed.

The president, in announcing the change on social media, called Bondi "a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend," and went on to say she will be transitioning to a new job in the private sector.

What was behind her firing?

"We'll never know for sure, but certainly the Epstein files factored into it. And Donald Trump doesn't like to see his political appointees ridiculed, for good reason. Pam Bondi's appearance before Congress was a disaster," said former federal prosecutor Ron Safer.

Ron safer led the criminal division at the U.S. Attorney's office in Chicago in the late 1990s. He said the revolving door at the Justice Department also is having an impact on federal prosecutors in Chicago.

"This office has seen an exodus of talent, and that is unprecedented. Every chief, including the chief of the criminal division, has left the office in the last six months. That causes a disruption to long-term investigations," Safer said.

Bondi's firing comes just days after a group of former federal prosecutors – including three former Chicago U.S. attorneys: Dan Webb, Scott Lassar, and Patrick Fitzgerald – formed a bipartisan "call to action" group aiming to bring dignity back to the Justice Department.

In an email, the group said the Justice Department is "ignoring its founding principles," adding, "we feel compelled to speak and act against the troubling events underway at the department."

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, the president's former personal attorney, will serve as acting attorney general following Bondi's ouster.

The president, in his roughly 19-minute speech from the White House, said the U.S. will hit Iran "extremely hard" over the next two to three weeks. He also threatened to obliterate all of Iran's electric generating plants and target its oil sites if the country's leaders don't make a deal. 

"I've made clear from the beginning of Operation Epic Fury that we will continue until our objectives are fully achieved," the president said. "Thanks to the progress we've made, I can say tonight that we are on track to complete all of America's military objectives shortly, very shortly. We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We're going to bring them back to the stone ages, where they belong."

The president addressed the nation as the midterm election-year war surpasses the one-month mark. Polling shows most Americans are skeptical of the war and wary of the rise in gas prices that it helped trigger.

He said Tuesday that he expects the war to last another two or three weeks before the operation concludes, unless Iran reaches a deal — a rough timeframe that he stuck to in Wednesday's speech.

Mr. Trump reminded America that past wars — World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq — lasted for years, while he expects this operation to end soon. "We are in this military operation, so powerful, so brilliant, against one of the most powerful countries for 32 days, and the country has been eviscerated," he said. 

"In the meantime," he continued, "discussions are ongoing. Regime change was not our goal. We never said regime change. But regime change has occurred because of all of their original leaders' death. They're all dead. The new group is less radical and much more reasonable."

But if "no deal is made, we have our eyes on key targets," he said, warning that the U.S. could "hit each and every one of their electric generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously." The president also threatened to hit Iranian oil industry targets.

Trump: Iran has suffered "devastating" losses

Mr. Trump made the case that the war has been successful at decimating Iran's military.

"In these past four weeks, our armed forces have delivered swift, decisive, overwhelming victories on the battlefield," the president said. "Victories like few people have ever seen before." 

The president lauded the destruction of Iran's navy and the country's "dramatically curtailed" ability to launch missiles and drones. He claimed the "core strategic objectives" of the war are "nearing completion," a version of what the White House has been saying in recent days. 

"Never in the history of warfare has an enemy suffered such clear and devastating large-scale losses in a matter of weeks," he continued. "Our enemies are losing and America, as it has been for five years under my presidency, is winning, and now winning bigger than ever before."

The president took a moment to recognize the 13 American servicemembers who "have laid down their lives in this fight to prevent our children from ever having to face a nuclear Iran." 

"We salute them and now we must honor them by completing the mission for which they gave their lives," he said. 

The president reiterated an argument he has made before: That without this intervention in Iran, the "most violent and thuggish regime on earth would be free to carry out their campaigns of terror, coercion, conquest and mass murder from behind a nuclear shield." 

Mr. Trump also claimed there would be "no Middle East and no Israel right now" had he not terminated the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal, and alleged Iran was "right at the doorstep" of building a nuclear weapon.

The U.S. intelligence community assessed last year that Iran did not have an active nuclear weapons program, and was several months away from making a nuclear weapon if it chose to do so.

He said Iranian officials "were also rapidly building a vast stockpile of conventional ballistic missiles and would soon have had missiles that could reach the American homeland, Europe and virtually any other place on earth."

Trump says Iran is responsible for high gas prices — and other countries must "grab" Strait of Hormuz

The president blamed rising U.S. gas prices on the Iranian regime.

"Many Americans have been concerned to see the recent rise in gasoline prices here at home," he said. "This short-term increase has been entirely the result of the Iranian regime launching deranged terror attacks against commercial oil tankers and neighboring countries that have nothing to do with the conflict. This is yet more proof that Iran can never be trusted with nuclear weapons."

The president also said countries that heavily rely on the Strait of Hormuz, a major oil route which Iran has effectively shuttered, "must take care of that passage" and "grab it and cherish it."

He suggested countries that can't purchase sufficient fuel for themselves should purchase it from the U.S.

"We have plenty, we have so much," he said. 

He also called on those countries to "go to the strait and just take it, protect it." 

When the conflict is over, "the strait will open up naturally," Mr. Trump said, repeating a version of the line he's said before.

Trump addresses America at crucial point in Iran war

Mr. Trump's speech on Wednesday was the first prime-time address the president has given since the start of the war on Feb. 28, although he has frequently spoken with reporters about the operation.

It came after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the "upcoming days will be decisive" in the war with Iran.

Mr. Trump has signaled that he's looking to wrap up the war shortly, and has signaled optimism about indirect talks between the U.S. and Iran that have taken place in recent days.

Still, hundreds of U.S. Special Operations Forces and thousands of Marines and Army paratroopers are now in the Middle East, giving Mr. Trump additional military options in Iran if he chooses to expand the war, sources told CBS News earlier this week. If needed, those forces could participate in operations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, target Iran's Kharg Island oil terminal or seize Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium.

Even as Mr. Trump insists a main goal is ensuring Iran never attains a nuclear weapon, he told Reuters he doesn't care about the highly enriched uranium Iran has stored in underground tunnels. If further enriched, the material could be used for nuclear weapons, but seizing such material would likely require a risky U.S. ground operation. The U.S. intelligence community assessed last year that Iran was not actively trying to build a nuclear bomb.

"That's so far underground, I don't care about that," the president said of Iran's enriched uranium, much of which is believed to be buried underneath rubble from a previous round of U.S. strikes last summer. "We'll always be watching it by satellite."

Mr. Trump praised the U.S.' allies in the Middle East in Wednesday's speech, including Israel and several Arab states. He did not directly lash out at NATO, after airing frustrations in recent days about the alliance over what he views as their failure to help the U.S. open the Strait of Hormuz, which normally carries one-fifth of the world's oil supply. Iran's effective closure of the strait has disrupted the supply of oil and sent prices sharply higher.

The president said this week he is "absolutely" considering withdrawing the U.S. from the treaty organization formed in the wake of World War II, in response to allies' decision not to help the U.S. with the strait.

Earlier in the war, Mr. Trump had suggested he may ramp up attacks on Iran and target the country's energy infrastructure unless it allowed ships to sail freely through the Strait of Hormuz. More recently, however, he has argued that other countries should bear responsibility for reopening the strait since the U.S. doesn't rely on oil from the region.

He told CBS News senior White House correspondent Weijia Jiang on Tuesday that he's not ready "quite yet" to abandon his attempts to force Iran to open the strait to all shipping traffic. But he said other countries that are reliant on Middle Eastern oil "have to come in and take care of it." 

"Iran has been decimated, but they're going to have to come in and do their own work," he said.

Meanwhile, the war abroad is affecting prices at home in a time when Americans view the economy as struggling and fear the war will make that worse. The average price for a gallon of gas in the U.S. topped $4 this week for the first time in nearly four years. Diesel prices have also soared, and consumer good prices are likely to increase with them. 

A CBS News poll from last month shows most Americans aren't sold on the Iran war, with 60% disapproving of the U.S. taking military action in Iran and 67% saying they are unwilling to pay more for gas during the conflict, though an overwhelming majority of Republicans support the war.

Asked about spiking gas prices, Mr. Trump said Tuesday: "All I have to do is leave Iran, and we'll be doing that very soon, and they'll come tumbling down."

A majority of justices seemed open to rejecting Mr. Trump's executive order, with several conservatives peppering the attorney arguing for the administration with questions about the legal underpinnings and practical applications of the directive.

Mr. Trump attended a portion of the arguments, the first time a sitting president has done so. He was accompanied by White House counsel David Warrington. Attorney General Pam Bondi also attended.

Following the session, Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social: "We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow 'Birthright' Citizenship!"

For more than 100 years, the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause has been understood to mean that nearly everyone born in the U.S. is automatically granted citizenship. The clause says that "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."

But the president's order, issued soon after he took office, embraced a narrower view, and seeks to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily. The order has been blocked by lower courts, which have found it likely illegal, and has not taken effect.

The question before the Supreme Court in the case, known as Trump v. Barbara, is whether the executive order complies with the 14th Amendment and an immigration law from 1952 that codified the language of the Citizenship Clause.

The administration's argument

Solicitor General D. John Sauer presented the case on behalf of the administration, asserting that unrestricted birthright citizenship "demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship." His argument hinged on the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the Citizenship Clause. 

Sauer said that the phrase was understood in the 19th century to mean those who are "domiciled" in the U.S., meaning those who are "lawfully present and have an intent to remain permanently." He said that the amendment has been misconstrued for decades to apply to almost all babies born in the U.S.

The solicitor general said an 1898 Supreme Court case known as Wong Kim Ark supports his theory. In that case, the justices ruled that Wong, who was born in the U.S. to Chinese parents, was an American citizen. The court cited the parents' "domicile" in the U.S. more than 20 times in its opinion. Sauer said the ruling was evidence that lawful permanent residence was seen as a prerequisite for citizenship.

"We agree there's a principle there in the 14th Amendment. It is that 'jurisdiction' means 'allegiance,' the allegiance of a — and this is very strongly reflected in 19th-century sources — the allegiance of an alien present in another country is determined by domicile," he said.

Chief Justice John Roberts questioned his interpretation of the amendment, saying it relies on "very quirky" examples of exceptions and broadens them to include millions of people in the country illegally.

"You obviously put a lot of weight on 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' but the examples you give to support that strike me as very quirky. You know, children of ambassadors, children of enemies during a hostile invasion, children on warships. And then you expand it to the whole class of illegal aliens who are here in the country," Roberts said. "I'm not quite sure how you can get to that big group from such tiny and sort of idiosyncratic examples."

Justice Elena Kagan told Sauer that "the text of the clause, I think, does not support you."

"I think you're sort of looking for some more technical, esoteric meaning. And then the question becomes, 'OK, if the text doesn't support you, if there's a real history of people using it that way,' but as far as I can tell, at the time of the 14th — you're using some pretty obscure sources to get to this concept," she said.

Justice Neil Gorsuch raised practical questions about Sauer's position, asking who would decide whether a person in the U.S. has established "domicile."

"How are we going to determine domicile? I mean, would we use contemporary sources on what qualifies as domicile in a state, or do we look in 1868? And do we have to do this for every single person?" he asked.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned why the framers of the 14th Amendment didn't express that they were seeking a more narrow citizenship rule, as Sauer claimed.

"If they were going to invent an entirely new kind of citizenship, like an American brand, why wouldn't we have seen more discussion of that in the debates? she asked.

She also pressed Sauer on how his definition of "domicile" would apply to certain people, specifically the children of individuals illegally trafficked into the country or those whose parents are unknown, and said some applications of the executive order may be "messy." 

"The thing about this is, then you have to adjudicate, if you're looking at parents and if you're looking at parents' domicile, then you have to adjudicate with residence and intent to stay," Barrett said. "What if you don't know who the parents are?"

Justice Samuel Alito, meanwhile, asked Sauer about the scope of his argument as it relates to undocumented immigrants. He noted that the nation was in an "unusual situation" because federal immigration laws have been "ineffectively and, in some instances, unenthusiastically enforced" by the government.

"So there are people who are subject to removal at any time if they are apprehended and they go through the proper procedures, but they have, in their minds, made a permanent home here, and have established roots," he said. "And that raises a humanitarian problem." 

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson likewise raised practical questions about what would happen if Mr. Trump's order is allowed to go into effect.

"How does this work? Are you suggesting that when a baby is born, people have to have documents, present documents? Is this happening in the delivery room? How are we determining when or whether a newborn child is a citizen of the United States under your rule?" she asked.

The Trump administration has said that the executive order is prospective, and it directs federal agencies not to issue or accept citizenship documents for children born more than 30 days after it takes effect. But opponents of the measure have warned that if the president prevails, the citizenship of generations of Americans born to parents in the country illegally or temporarily could be called into question.

"The logic of your position, if accepted, is that this president or the next president or a Congress or someone else could decide that it shouldn't be prospective," Justice Sonia Sotomayor said. "There would be nothing limiting that, according to your theory."

Roberts asked Sauer about the prevalence of "birth tourism," in which parents travel to the U.S. to give birth so their child will have citizenship. The Trump administration has argued that birthright citizenship has spawned a birth tourism industry, and Sauer said that while no one knows for sure how prevalent the practice is, there are 500 birth tourism companies in China.

Still, Roberts responded, "you do agree that that has no impact on the legal analysis before us" and noted that the practice was not an issue in the 19th century. Sauer said it was evidence of the negative impacts of the prevailing interpretation of the Citizenship Clause: "We're in a new world now … where 8 billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who is a U.S. citizen."

"Well, it's a new world. It's the same Constitution," Roberts replied.

The challengers' argument

Cecilia Wang, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, argued on behalf of those challenging the president's order, three parents with children who would be impacted by the directive. Wang warned that a ruling in the administration's favor would have vast repercussions. 

"Swaths of American laws would be rendered senseless. Thousands of American babies will immediately lose their citizenship, and if you credit the government's theory, the citizenship of millions of Americans past, present and future could be called into question," she said. "All of this tells us the government's theory is wrong."

The justices mostly focused on the court's reasoning in Wong Kim Ark in their questioning of Wang, asking her why the court would reference Wong's parents' "domicile" so often in its 1898 opinion if it had no bearing on whether a child is entitled to citizenship. 

"Why put 'domicile' in? Sometimes it's hard to figure out what is the holding of the case here. He tells us this is the holding of the case. Why put 'domicile' in there?" Alito asked. "Why put it in if it's irrelevant?"

Wang argued that the concept of "domicile" was not part of the court's reasoning in the case.

"You have to follow that controlling rule of decision, and if you follow that rule, you get the same result for people without domicile," she said. "Wong Kim Ark says six times in the first parts of the opinion, as well as on the page the government focuses on, that domicile is not relevant."

Kavanaugh hinted that Wang's side would prevail if the justices agreed with her reading of Wong Kim Ark.

"I think Mr. Sauer acknowledged that, and you mentioned this in your opening, that if we agree with you on how to read Wong Kim Ark, then you win. So if we did agree with you on Wong Kim Ark, that could be just a short opinion, right? That says, 'The better reading is respondents' reading, government doesn't ask us to overrule, affirmed,'" Kavanaugh said.

"Yes," Wang said to laughter. "I do think it would be prudent for the court to reaffirm its decision in Wong Kim Ark … but of course, we're happy to take a win on any ground."

If the Supreme Court invalidates Mr. Trump's executive order, it could do so on both statutory and constitutional grounds. The justices could rule that the measure violates the Immigration and Nationality Act, which Congress enacted in 1952, more than 50 years after the high court's decision in Wong Kim Ark.

During an earlier exchange with Sauer, Kavanaugh questioned why Congress would adopt the language of the Citizenship Clause in that law if it wanted to limit the scope of Wong Kim Ark or eliminate any ambiguity over who is entitled to U.S. citizenship.

"Given Wong Kim Ark, one might have expected Congress to use a different phrase if it wanted to try to disagree with Wong Kim Ark on what the scope of birthright citizenship or the scope of citizenship should be, and yet Congress repeats that same language, knowing what the interpretation had been," he said. "So how are we to think about that?"

A decision from the Supreme Court is expected by late June or early July.

Mr. Trump has railed against NATO allies for refusing to join the war against Iran, though he did not consult with them in advance or involve them in any planning for its economic and security fallout.

Asked by The Telegraph's Washington correspondent if he would consider ending U.S. membership in the alliance after the Iran war, Mr. Trump said: "Oh yes, I would say [it's] beyond reconsideration. I was never swayed by NATO. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and (Russian President Vladimir) Putin knows that too, by the way."

Mr. Trump has disparaged the alliance for years, but he is not legally empowered to make such a change on his own. 

By law, to actually pull the U.S. from the alliance or suspend U.S. membership, he would have to gain the "advice and consent of the Senate," with a two-thirds majority vote required to approve the move, according to Congress.gov, the official federal government website for legislation information.

For NATO allies trying — with less and less help from Washington — to assist Ukraine amid Russia's ongoing full-scale invasion, the latest rhetorical blow from Mr. Trump will be cause for yet more concern. 

For Russia's Putin, however, it will be welcome news, as he has framed his invasion of neighboring Ukraine as a bid to stop NATO's eastward expansion — and who has worked through various means for years to undermine the alliance and sew division amongst its members.

In his remarks to the Telegraph, Mr. Trump equated the Ukraine and Iran wars, saying he "didn't insist too much" that NATO allies join the Iran conflict, as "I just think it should be automatic. … We've been there automatically, including Ukraine. Ukraine wasn't our problem. It was a test, and we were there for them, and we would always have been there for them. They weren't there for us."

Asked about Mr. Trump's remarks, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Britain is "fully committed to NATO" and called it "the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen."

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that a legal challenge brought by a preservation group that sued to block President Trump's construction project was likely to succeed on the merits, because "no statute" the government used to justify the construction "comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have."

The ruling takes effect in 14 days. The Trump administration quickly told the court that it intends to appeal the ruling.

In December, the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the U.S. sued the administration for allegedly failing to adhere to federal guidelines prior to demolishing the East Wing and breaking ground on a ballroom. The Trust also questioned the $400 million project's funding mechanism, which is largely from private donations.

The ballroom project came together quickly. Mr. Trump announced it last summer, and by September, the East Wing had been torn down, even though the president previously said the existing White House structure would remain intact. A panel of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, filled with allies of Mr. Trump, voted unanimously to approve the ballroom proposal last month. The National Park Service has said construction could wrap up by mid-2028.

The project has drawn controversy from congressional Democrats and preservation groups who argue that the Trump administration was making major changes to the White House without enough public input. The administration has defended the project, casting it as a useful addition to the complex and part of a long line of alterations to the White House.

In February, following the National Trust for Historic Preservation's initial lawsuit, Leon ruled that the construction could continue temporarily. He found that the group's legal challenge was not comprehensive enough to prove Mr. Trump lacked the authority to renovate the building with private funds and without congressional action.

Leon allowed the National Trust for Historic Preservation to again take its legal arguments for a preliminary injunction to court earlier this month, where he expressed skepticism of the Justice Department's legal arguments defending the mechanism to pay for the ballroom.

During the hearing, the judge said that the Trump administration's continued arguments that the ballroom was a legally allowable "alteration" to White House grounds was a "brazen interpretation of the laws of vocabulary."

"This isn't any national park," Leon said. "This is an iconic symbol of this nation."

Leon offered similar views in his opinion issued Tuesday.

"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!" Leon wrote, adding that "the ballroom construction project must stop until Congress authorizes its completion."

Leon ruled that three different federal laws give Congress, not the White House, authority over approving funding and alterations to federal property, and that the project must be authorized by federal lawmakers.

"Unfortunately for Defendants, unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop! But here is the good news. It is not too late for Congress to authorize the continued construction of the ballroom project," Leon wrote.

"The President may at any time go to Congress to obtain express authority to construct a ballroom and to do so with private funds. Indeed, Congress may even choose to appropriate funds for the ballroom, or at least decide that some other funding scheme is acceptable. Either way, Congress will thereby retain its authority over the nation's property and its oversight over the Government's spending," the judge added.

Mr. Trump has claimed to have raised the $400 million he says is necessary for construction from private donors and major corporations like Lockheed Martin, Amazon and Microsoft, many which have business before the government. 

The funds were collected by a nonprofit organization, handed off to the National Park Service and then deposited into an account controlled by the president that is normally used for minor White House repairs and maintenance, according to court records. 

At a hearing in January, Leon repeatedly called the financial arrangement a "Rube Goldberg" machine, referring to the cartoonist and inventor who made complex contraptions to perform simple tasks. He raised the same concern in this week's ruling.

"While its legality is not squarely at issue here, this funding mechanism is, to say the least, a far cry from affirmative congressional authorization," Leon wrote Tuesday.

Carol Quillen, president and CEO of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, said in a statement the group is "pleased" with the ruling.

"This is a win for the American people on a project that forever impacts one of the most beloved and iconic places in our nation," Quillen wrote.

The ballroom is part of a wider effort by Mr. Trump to put his architectural stamp on Washington during his second term in office. He is also planning to renovate the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, drawing a lawsuit from the National Trust for Historic Preservation. He has also drawn up plans to build a massive triumphal arch across the river from the capital in Virginia.

Mr. Trump called Leon's ruling "so wrong" later Tuesday.

"We've built many things at the White House over the years. They don't get congressional approval when they build in the White House. It's totally separate, and especially when it's a donation," he told reporters.

The high court ruled 8-1 that Colorado's law, when applied to talk therapy provided by counselor Kaley Chiles, regulates speech based on viewpoint. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter. She read her dissenting opinion from the bench.

The ruling reverses a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit that found the law did not violate Chiles' free-speech rights. The appeals court instead concluded that it regulates professional conduct and only incidentally burdens speech.

The decision from the high court is a narrow one and does not overturn Colorado's law outright. It requires the lower courts to apply the most stringent level of scrutiny when evaluating its constitutionality, one that sets a high bar for the state to meet.

"Colorado's law addressing conversion therapy does not just ban physical interventions. In cases like this, it censors speech based on viewpoint," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority. "Colorado may regard its policy as essential to public health and safety. Certainly, censorious governments throughout history have believed the same. But the First Amendment stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country."

Gorsuch write that Colorado's law doesn't just regulate the content of Chiles' speech, but "goes a step further, prescribing what views she may and may not express."

In her dissent, Jackson wrote that to do anything other than allow Colorado's regulation of medical treatment "opens a dangerous can of worms."

"It threatens to impair States' ability to regulate the provision of medical care in any respect. It extends the Constitution into uncharted territory in an utterly irrational fashion. And it ultimately risks grave harm to Americans' health and wellbeing," she wrote.

Jim Campbell, chief legal counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom who argued on Chiles' behalf before the Supreme Court, cheered the ruling.

"Kids deserve real help affirming that their bodies are not a mistake and that they are wonderfully made. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision today is a significant win for free speech, common sense, and families desperate to help their children," he said in a statement. "States cannot silence voluntary conversations that help young people seeking to grow comfortable with their bodies."

Chiles called the ruling a "victory for counselors and, more importantly, kids and families everywhere."

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said the state disagrees with the Supreme Court's decision and is reviewing it to assess its "full impact on Colorado law and on our responsibility to protect consumers and patients."

"Today's decision is a setback for Colorado's efforts to protect children and families from harmful and discredited mental health practices, and it limits the authority states have long exercised to safeguard patients from substandard care," he said in a statement.

Colorado's ban on conversion therapy

Colorado is one of more than 20 states that have enacted restrictions on conversion therapy. Its measure, called the Minor Conversion Therapy Law, was enacted in 2019 and prohibits mental health professionals from engaging in any practice or treatment, including talk therapy, that attempts to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity. Violators face fines of up to $5,000 and may be suspended from practicing or stripped of their license.

Several years after Colorado's law went into effect, Chiles, a licensed counselor who performs "faith-informed" counseling when sought, sued state officials. She argued that the ban violates her free-speech rights by censoring her conversations with patients based on viewpoint and the content of those discussions. 

She aims to engage in talk therapy with minors who want to "reduce or eliminate unwanted sexual attractions, change sexual behaviors or grow in the experience of harmony with [their] physical bodies." Chiles argued that under Colorado's ban, families and teens who want to address gender dysphoria by aligning identity and biological sex at birth cannot work with a licensed counselor to help reach that goal. But the measure does allow treatment that supports patients undergoing gender transition, Chiles' lawyers said.

Colorado officials, though, said the law regulates medical treatments and practices provided by professionals licensed by the state. They argued it is part of a long history of states regulating the health care profession to protect patients from substandard or harmful treatment. Major medical associations have warned that practices aimed at trying to change a patient's sexual orientation or gender identity are potentially harmful to young people and not supported by credible scientific evidence.

Lower courts had upheld Colorado's law, finding that it regulates the professional conduct of mental health professionals, not their speech.

The decision from the Supreme Court joins a line of rulings that stand at the intersection of the free speech rights of religious parties and LGBTQ rights. The high court in 2015 legalized same-sex marriage and, five years later, ruled that a federal civil rights law prohibiting workplace discrimination based on sex extends to gay and transgender people.

But its conservative majority has in recent years also sided with plaintiffs who have raised religious objections to state and local measures. In its last term, the high court ruled in favor of a group of Maryland parents who wanted to opt their children out of instruction featuring storybooks that address gender identity and sexual orientation. 

In another dispute from Colorado, the Supreme Court in 2023 found that the First Amendment prohibited the state from forcing a Christian graphic designer to express messages that were contrary to her closely held religious beliefs.

Tyler Robinson's defense team said in recent court filings that an analysis from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a federal law enforcement agency, couldn't conclusively connect a bullet fragment recovered during an autopsy to the rifle found near the scene.

The FBI is running additional tests, according to court documents.

Those documents say the FBI is "in the process" of conducting a second bullet analysis as well as an analysis of the lead the bullet was made of, according to CBS Salt Lake City affiliate KUTV.

The ATF report has been kept private, but attorneys have cited snippets in other public filings that say the results were inconclusive

The success of a forensic ballistics analysis largely depends on the size and condition of the bullet fragments. Experts are looking for unique, microscopic markings that are left on a bullet as it passes through the gun's barrel. The scratches are like fingerprints in that no two firearms make identical markings.

The defense said in its motion that it may try to use the analysis to clear Robinson of blame during the preliminary hearing, while prosecutors aim to show they have enough evidence against him to proceed with a trial.

Prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty for Robinson, 22, who is charged with aggravated murder in the Sept. 10 shooting of the conservative activist on the Utah Valley University campus in Orem. Robinson has not yet entered a plea.

Prosecutors have said DNA consistent with Robinson's was found on the trigger of the rifle, the fired cartridge casing and two unfired cartridges. Defense attorneys note that forensic reports indicate multiple people's DNA was found on some items, which they say requires a more complex analysis.

Robinson reportedly texted his romantic partner that he targeted Kirk because he "had enough of his hatred," prosecutors have said.

Robinson is due back in court April 17 for a hearing on a defense motion to ban cameras from the courtroom.

The Cook County Treasurer's office just completed a 30-year analysis of just why property taxes have been soaring.

Read the study: "How State Laws Failed to Stop Decades of Skyrocketing Property Taxes"

Investigators from the office found from 1995 to 2024, Cook County property taxes jumped 182% to $19.2 billion — more than twice the rate of inflation, which went up about 91% while wages increased 161%.

This means more of Cook County homeowners' hard-earned money is going toward paying property taxes than ever before.

"The 30-year study really pinpoints what's wrong. So the biggest problem is that there's just spending like drunken sailors. I mean, so every year, all 562 governments come into Cook County, and they say: 'You know what? This is how much money I want,'" Pappas said. "So what's happened is that amount of money went from $12 billion to $19 billion. That's a lot of extra money."

The additional funding that so many different governing bodies in Cook County are demanding has to come from somewhere, Pappas emphasized. That somewhere tends to be property taxes.

Illinois state lawmakers came up with regulations to limit property tax hikes, Pappas said. Notably, this included the Property Tax Limitation Law (PTELL), which went into effect in Cook County in 1994 and limits property tax increases to 5% or the rate of inflation for the preceding levy year — whichever is less — "and that's where you have to stop," Pappas said.

"What happened is there's six ways to get around that," Pappas said. "They take advantage of these little, little cracks in the wall, and they slither through, and they say: 'You know what? Let's do a referendum this year. We're going to put on $30 million for a new swimming pool, OK?' And just like the last election, 20% of the people come out, not 80%, and the $30 million passes, and it becomes added to the property tax."

Also key among the loopholes how no limits are placed on tax increases in special taxing districts such as tax increment financing districts or TIFs.

"Tax increment financing districts have gone up 1,000%," said Pappas. "Bond deals aren't subject to any kind of structure at all."

In a TIF district, property tax dollars for schools, parks, and other taxing districts are frozen for at least 23 years, so that all property tax increases afterward to go into a fund to improve struggling neighborhoods. TIF districts have been the subject of intense criticism for decades for a variety of reasons — notably, longtime Chicago Reader columnist Ben Joravsky characterized the TIF program as amounting to a slush fund in a series of columns years ago.

Meanwhile, Pappas also emphasized that over a 30-year period, K-12 public school systems are up to accounting nearly 55 of the total property tax burden in Cook County.

Pappas' office added that state government exacerbated the problem by enhancing local government pension benefits while lowering the share of state revenue that goes to cities and villages whose taxes rose by 201% over 30 years.

So what is to be done about all this?

"This is like pouring gasoline on a fire. The fire's the people at my counter, OK, who come in complaining. This study pours gas on it to ignite some action," Pappas said. "The biggest action has to be to cut spending at the local level. You can't go to Springfield and say: 'Hey, you know what? You need to give me more money,' because there's no money there to give. What has to happen in Springfield, they have to close these loopholes — and there's six or seven of them that have to be closed."

Pappas said her report is calling attention to a problem that "needs to be fixed in a way that the spending stops."

Meanwhile, asked Monday morning if she is still running for mayor of Chicago, Pappas said, "I'm in!"

U.S. organizers had estimated that the first two rounds of No Kings rallies drew more than 5 million people in June and 7 million in October. On Saturday, they estimated that at least 8 million participants took part in more than 3,300 events worldwide. 

Thousands of people stood shoulder-to-shoulder on the Minnesota Capitol lawn and surrounding streets in St. Paul. Some held upside down U.S. flags, historically a sign of distress.

The event's headliner was Bruce Springsteen, who performed "Streets of Minneapolis." He wrote the song in response to the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents and in tribute to the thousands of Minnesotans who took to the streets over the winter to protest the Trump administration's aggressive immigration enforcement.

Before he launched into the song, Springsteen lamented Good and Pretti's deaths but said people's continued pushback against U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement has given the rest of the country hope.

"Your strength and your commitment told us that this was still America," he said. "And this reactionary nightmare, and these invasions of American cities, will not stand."

The bill also included singer Joan Baez, actor Jane Fonda, Sen. Bernie Sanders and a long list of other activists, labor leaders and elected officials.

The rally at the Minnesota Capitol in St. Paul was designated the national flagship event, in recognition of how the state where federal agents fatally shot two people who were monitoring Trump's immigration crackdown became an epicenter of resistance. 

St. Paul police shut down several streets around the area. No Kings organizers estimated that more than 200,000 people attended the St. Paul rally Saturday, surpassing the numbers from the Women's March in 2017. 

The protests were mostly peaceful, but some arrests were reported.

In Los Angeles, authorities deployed tear gas near a federal detention center downtown. One man had a leaf blower, attempting to clear the air. The Los Angeles Police Department later arrested people for failing to disperse. Earlier in the day, a band was playing and people were dancing to Spanish-language music.

The Denver Police Department said on the social platform X that it declared an unlawful assembly and deployed smoke canisters after a small group of protesters blocked a road and did not leave as asked. Some threw the canisters back at officers, police said. At least eight people were arrested, as was a ninth person later on who police said was throwing objects.

Hundreds of "No Kings" rallies held across the U.S.

People rallied from New York City, with almost 8.5 million residents in a solidly blue state, to Driggs, a town of fewer than 2,000 people in eastern Idaho, a state Mr. Trump carried with 66% of the vote in 2024.

Philadelphia's "No Kings" rally drew thousands of people downtown, shutting down roadways. Indivisible Chicago and the ACLU of Illinois, among others, organized a large rally in Chicago. Other rallies took place in Texas and Detroit, and at least 40 events were scheduled throughout the day in Southeast Michigan.

The White House dismissed the nationwide protests as the product of "leftist funding networks" with little real public support.

"The only people who care about these Trump Derangement Therapy Sessions are the reporters who are paid to cover them," White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.

The Trump administration's aggressive immigration enforcement, particularly in Minnesota, were just one item on a long list of protester grievances that also included the war in Iran and the rollback of transgender rights.

In Washington, hundreds marched past the Lincoln Memorial and into the National Mall, holding signs that read "Put down the crown, clown" and "Regime change begins at home." Demonstrators rang bells, played drums and chanted "No kings."

Bill Jarcho was there from Seattle, joined by six people dressed as insects wearing tactical vests that said, "LICE," spoofing ICE as part of what he called a "mock and awe" tour.

"What we provide is mockery to the king," Jarcho said. "It's about taking authoritarianism and making fun of it, which they hate."

About 40,000 people marched in a "No Kings" event in San Diego, police there said.

In New York, Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said during a news conference that Trump and his supporters want people to be afraid to protest.

"They want us to be afraid that there's nothing we can do to stop them," she said. "But you know what? They are wrong — dead wrong."

But organizers said two-thirds of the RSVPs for the rallies came from outside of major urban centers. That included communities in conservative-leaning states like Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Utah, South Dakota and Louisiana, as well in competitive suburban areas of Pennsylvania, Georgia and Arizona.

"No Kings" rallies also held around the world

Rallies were also taking place in more than a dozen other countries, from Europe to Latin America to Australia, Ezra Levin, a co-executive director of Indivisible, a group spearheading the events, said in an interview. Countries with constitutional monarchies call the protests "No Tyrants," he said.  

In Rome, thousands of people marched with defiant chants aimed at Premier Giorgia Meloni, whose conservative government saw its referendum for streamlining Italy's judiciary badly fail earlier this week amid criticism that it was a threat to the courts' independence. Protesters waved banners protesting the Israeli and US attacks on Iran, calling for "A world free from wars."

In London, people protesting the war in Iran held banners that said, "Stop the far right" and "Stand up to Racism."

And on Saturday morning in Paris, several hundred people, mostly Americans living in France, along with French labor unions and human rights organizations, gathered at the Bastille.

"I protest all of Trump's illegal, immoral, reckless, and feckless, endless wars," Ada Shen, the Paris No Kings organizer, said.

The FBI said in a statement that it is "aware of malicious actors targeting" Patel's personal email information and said it has "taken all necessary steps to mitigate potential risks associated with this activity."

It also said that the information in question "is historical in nature and involves no government information." 

The breach was first reported by Reuters, which said the hacker group Handala HackTeam took credit for the attack and posted images online of the FBI director and his purported resume.

The breach comes not long after the Justice Department earlier this month seized four domains connected to the Handala group, as part of an ongoing effort to disrupt hacking and transnational repression schemes conducted by the Islamic Republic of Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security. 

The domain used to carry out the hack against Patel was registered the same day the Justice Department announced it had seized the four domains associated with the group, on March 19.

The FBI said in its statement that the State Department has offered a $10 million reward for information leading to the identification of the Handala Hack Team. 

After the start of the war in Iran, the Justice Department said Handala was responsible for a number of cyber attacks, including a malware attack against a U.S.-based multinational medical technologies firm. In another cyber incident, the department alleged that Handala Group had posted the names and sensitive other data from approximately 190 individuals associated with or employed by the Israeli Defense Force or Israeli government.

In an online post, the Handala Group appeared to announce its successful attack against Patel's email. In the post, it referenced the seizure of its domains by the U.S. government and said, "We decided to respond to this ridiculous show in a way that will be remembered forever."

"Kash Patel, the current head of the FBI, who once saw his name displayed with pride on the agency's headquarters, will now find his name among the list of successfully hacked victims. The so-called "impenetrable" systems of the FBI were brought to their knees within hours by our team," the group added.

The post included photos of Patel as well as a copy of what appears to be his resume, which includes his personal email account.

The survivors filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court in California on Thursday arguing that the Justice Department's disclosure of their personally identifiable information was a violation of federal privacy law. They are seeking at least $1,000 per class member from the government and an unspecific amount of damages from Google.

In their lawsuit, the survivors said that while the Justice Department took down their information after it was published in late 2025 and earlier this year, online entities like Google continued to republish it and have refused requests to remove it.

"Survivors now face renewed trauma," they said in their suit. "Strangers call them, email them, threaten their physical safety, and accuse them of conspiring with Epstein when they are, in reality, Epstein's victims."

The Justice Department published more than 3 million pages of records related to its investigation into Epstein after Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the department to disclose all of its unclassified material. 

Documents were made public in several tranches in late December and through the end of January, and included videos, court records, FBI and Justice Department documents, emails, text messages and news clippings. Some of the material included mentions of prominent figures like President Trump, former President Bill Clinton, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as Prince Andrew, and billionaires Elon Musk and Bill Gates.

But the files also initially contained nearly 100 survivors' personal information, including their names, phone numbers and images. After learning of the disclosures, the Justice Department took down the documents containing that information, including one with unredacted photos of 21 survivors and most of their birthdates. 

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Justice Department reviewed 6 million pages in all and released roughly half of those pages. A portion of the records were withheld for various reasons, he said, including because they contain survivors' personal information.

The survivors said in their lawsuit that while the Justice Department removed the files from its website, the department has known that the unredacted documents are still publicly available on other websites, including those maintained by Google. The government has "done nothing to demand their removal," they said.

Public statements from Blanche, "viewed together with DOJ's subsequent document-dump, demonstrate that the United States intentionally prioritized volume and speed of public disclosure over the safety and privacy of Epstein survivors, adopting a release now, retract later approach that made unlawful disclosures of victim (personally identifying information) not merely foreseeable, but inevitable," the survivors said.

 Epstein was investigated by state authorities in Florida in 2005. He agreed to plead guilty to two state prostitution charges and serve an 18-month prison sentence as part of a deal with federal prosecutors that saw him avoid federal prosecution.

Epstein was then indicted on federal sex trafficking charges in 2019. He died by suicide at a Manhattan correctional facility while awaiting trial.

The addition of Mr. Trump's signature to paper currency will honor the 250th anniversary of U.S. independence this year, the department said. 

"There is no more powerful way to recognize the historic achievements of our great country and President Donald J. Trump than U.S dollar bills bearing his name," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement. The change will roll out this year, but few other details were immediately released.

Mr. Trump's signature will appear alongside Bessent's, the department said. U.S. paper currency has traditionally carried the signatures of Treasury officials. 

U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach said in a statement that the unprecedented move to add the president's signature "is not only appropriate, but also well deserved."

The announcement comes after this month's approval of a final design for a 24-karat gold commemorative coin featuring Mr. Trump's likeness to mark America's 250th birthday on July 4. Federal officials have also floated the idea of a $1 coin featuring Mr. Trump's image.

Since the start of his second term, the president has sought to attach his name and image to various institutions, including the renaming of the Kennedy Center performing arts venue to the Trump-Kennedy Center. Mr. Trump's name was also added to the U.S. Institute of Peace building in December. 

Iran — which denies having any nuclear weapons ambitions — has amassed a stockpile of uranium that is enriched to near the level of purity necessary to build a bomb. Mr. Trump ordered strikes on a trio of key Iranian nuclear sites last June, causing extensive damage and leaving the status of the stockpile unclear. Now, less than a year later, the president is carrying out a much larger military campaign.

"We will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon," Mr. Trump said in a video announcing what he called a "massive and ongoing operation." He said he had "sought repeatedly to make a deal," but Iranian officials "rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can't take it anymore."

The United States and Iran had engaged in several rounds of indirect negotiations in recent weeks, as a fleet of U.S. naval vessels and military aircraft arrived in the Middle East to ratchet up the pressure. 

Here are some details on Iran's nuclear program: 

How close is Iran to making a nuclear weapon, and is it building one right now?

In recent years, Iran has rapidly increased its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. As of mid-June 2025, shortly before the U.S.'s strikes that month, Iran had enriched some 972 pounds of uranium up to 60% purity, according to estimates from the International Atomic Energy Agency. 

By comparison, Iran had 605.8 pounds of 60%-enriched uranium in February 2025, and 267.9 pounds a year before that, the IAEA has said. According to the U.N. watchdog's metrics, about 92.5 pounds of 60%-enriched uranium is enough to build a single nuclear weapon if enriched further.

That material is just a short step away from weapons-grade 90%-enriched uranium. 

The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency estimated last May that it would take Iran "probably less than one week" to produce enough weapons-grade uranium to make its first bomb, if it decided to do so. Actually building a bomb could take somewhat longer: Another intelligence summary from last year found that Iran could make a nuclear device within three to eight months unless it faced technical or logistical delays, CBS News has previously reported.

What's not clear, however, is whether Iran has made the decision to build a nuclear weapon. Iran is believed to have halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, and the U.S. intelligence community assessed last spring that the program hadn't restarted.

"Iran almost certainly is not producing nuclear weapons, but Iran has undertaken activities in recent years that better position it to produce them, if it chooses to do so," the DIA said in May.

Asked on Feb. 18 whether the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency had seen any indication that Iran might currently be working to develop a nuclear weapon, the agency's director-general Rafael Grossi told a French television network it had not. 

"No," he told TF1, adding: "On the contrary, I see, today, a willingness on both sides to reach an agreement," referring to the U.S. and Iran.

Iran, for its part, has long insisted that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful, and that it does not intend to develop a nuclear weapon.

Iran's stockpile includes uranium enriched far beyond the level needed for most non-military uses like nuclear power or medical applications. The IAEA said in May that Iran is now "the only non-nuclear-weapon State to produce such nuclear material."

What impact did the last U.S. strikes on Iran have?

Last June's airstrikes targeted Iran's Fordo and Natanz enrichment facilities and a research site near the city of Isfahan. It's not clear how much the strikes damaged Iran's nuclear program. 

Mr. Trump has long said the strikes "obliterated" the three nuclear sites, setting back the program by "basically decades." 

The IAEA's Grossi told CBS News in June that the strikes caused "severe damage" but not "total damage." 

In his interview with the French network in February, Grossi said Iran's nuclear material was "still there, in large quantities," despite the U.S. strikes, though "some of it may be less accessible." 

Iran also is not currently enriching uranium, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Feb. 25, though he alleged that "they're trying to get to the point where they ultimately can." 

Satellite images from late January show roofs built over damaged buildings at the Natanz and Isfahan sites, potentially indicating efforts by Iran to salvage any remaining materials. 

A confidential report issued by the IAEA assessed that Iran is conducting unexplained activity at nuclear sites that were bombed by the U.S., CBS News has confirmed.

The IAEA says it withdrew its inspectors from Iran for safety reasons shortly after the June strikes, and Iran moved to suspend cooperation with the agency the following month. The agency said in November that it had been able to conduct some inspections in the months following the attacks, but not at any of the sites that were struck by U.S. forces.

Iran downplayed the strikes, arguing they didn't eliminate its technological capabilities.

"Yes, you destroyed the facilities, the machines," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Fox News in January. "But the technology cannot be bombed, and the determination also cannot be bombed."

What's the history of Iran's nuclear program?

Iran's nuclear program dates back decades, with some early research activity taking place under the U.S.-allied government that controlled the country before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. By the mid-1980s, Iran started developing — or acquiring on the black market — the technology required to build centrifuges that can enrich uranium, according to the IAEA.

The country's ambitions drew intense international pressure starting in 2002, when an anti-regime group alleged that Iran had secretly built a pair of nuclear facilities. Former President George W. Bush's administration later alleged that Iran was working to develop missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons. 

The IAEA has said that until 2003, Iran had a "structured program" to carry out "activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device." The agency added that some of those activities have military and non-military uses, but some "are specific to nuclear weapons."

While the U.S. intelligence assessment was that Iran stopped trying to develop nuclear weapons in 2003, the country resumed enriching uranium at various points after that. As a result, it had faced years of increasingly tight sanctions. 

In 2015, then-President Barack Obama's administration struck a deal with Iran and other global powers to limit the country's uranium stockpiles and enrichment capacity for a set period of time, and to submit Iran's nuclear program to IAEA monitoring, in exchange for sanctions relief. The agreement was known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

Three years later, Mr. Trump withdrew the U.S. unilaterally from that deal, which he argued was insufficient. He imposed a new round of harsh sanctions, dubbing it a "maximum pressure" campaign to force Iran to negotiate a new agreement. Efforts by the Biden administration and European parties to the JCPOA to revive the deal were unsuccessful.

Since then, Iran has stopped abiding by the terms of that agreement, dramatically ramping up its uranium enrichment program, including by enriching uranium to 60% purity for the first time.

At times, Mr. Trump has pushed Iran to give up uranium enrichment altogether, rather than just sticking to lower levels of enrichment in order to support a civil nuclear program. 

"They want to enrich a little bit. You don't have to enrich when you have that much oil," the president said on Feb. 27. "I say, no enrichment." 

Araghchi has ruled out that idea, describing the enrichment program as a "matter of dignity and pride."

"We have every right to enjoy a peaceful nuclear energy, including enrichment," he told CBS News in a Feb. 22 interview. "As a sovereign country, we have every right to decide for ourselves, by ourselves. We have developed this technology by ourselves, by our scientists, and it's very dear to us, because we have paid a lot."