Los principales diplomáticos de potencias regionales clave se reunieron el domingo en Pakistán para analizar cómo poner fin a los combates en Oriente Medio, aunque había pocas señales de progreso mientras Israel y Estados Unidos continuaban atacando a Irán, y Teherán respondía disparando misiles y drones en toda la región.

Pakistán indicó que los ministros de Exteriores de Arabia Saudí, Turquía y Egipto participaban en las conversaciones en Islamabad. El primer ministro paquistaní, Shehbaz Sharif, afirmó que él y el presidente iraní, Masoud Pezeshkian, mantuvieron “amplias conversaciones” sobre las hostilidades regionales.

Más de 3.000 personas han muerto en la guerra de un mes que comenzó con ataques de Estados Unidos e Israel contra Irán, lo que desencadenó los ataques de Irán contra Israel y los estados árabes del Golfo vecinos. La guerra también ha amenazado los suministros de petróleo y gas, y el control de Irán sobre el estratégico estrecho de Ormuz ha sacudido los mercados.

Estados Unidos e Israel no participaban en las conversaciones en Pakistán. Estados Unidos ha enviado tropas adicionales a Oriente Medio, mientras que los rebeldes hutíes de Yemen se sumaron a los combates durante el fin de semana, lo que amenazaba con ampliar la guerra y complicar aún más el transporte marítimo mundial.

Israel anunció oleadas de ataques entrantes desde Irán el domingo y se oían explosiones en todo Teherán.

Líderes de Oriente Medio intentan romper el estancamiento

El egipcio Badr Abdelatty, el turco Hakan Fidan y el príncipe saudí Faisal Bin Farhan acudieron a Islamabad como parte de conversaciones programadas días después de que Estados Unidos ofreciera a Irán una “lista de acciones” de 15 puntos, entregada a través de Pakistán como marco para un posible acuerdo de paz. Abdelatty dijo que las reuniones buscaban abrir un “diálogo directo” entre Estados Unidos e Irán, que durante la guerra se han comunicado en gran medida a través de mediadores.

Funcionarios iraníes han rechazado públicamente el plan de Washington y descartaron la idea de negociar bajo presión. Aun así, Press TV, el brazo en inglés de la televisora estatal de Irán, informó que Teherán había redactado su propia propuesta de cinco puntos, citando a un funcionario anónimo. Según se informó, el plan pide detener los asesinatos de funcionarios iraníes, garantías contra futuros ataques, reparaciones por la guerra, el fin de las hostilidades y que Teherán obtenga el “ejercicio de soberanía sobre el estrecho de Ormuz”.

El fin de semana ofreció pocos indicios de que las conversaciones redujeran la desconexión entre Estados Unidos e Irán. Funcionarios estadounidenses han insistido en que la guerra podría estar acercándose a un punto de inflexión, pero los líderes iraníes continúan rechazando públicamente las negociaciones.

Por el contrario, Estados Unidos ha enviado miles de marines y paracaidistas adicionales a la región. Y los hutíes respaldados por Irán, que gobiernan partes de Yemen, anunciaron su esperada entrada en la guerra, lanzando misiles hacia lo que llamaron “sitios militares israelíes sensibles” por primera vez el sábado.

A pesar de los despliegues, el secretario de Estado de Estados Unidos, Marco Rubio, dijo el viernes que Washington “puede lograr todos nuestros objetivos sin tropas terrestres” mientras crece la oposición interna a ampliar la guerra a una posible invasión terrestre, incluso entre los republicanos.

Teherán amenaza con represalias contra universidades de Israel y EEUU

Irán advirtió el domingo de una escalada adicional después de que ataques aéreos alcanzaran varias universidades, incluidas algunas que Israel afirmó que se utilizaban para investigación y desarrollo nuclear.

La Guardia Revolucionaria, un cuerpo paramilitar, advirtió en un comunicado el domingo que Irán consideraría a las universidades israelíes y a las sucursales de universidades estadounidenses en la región como “objetivos legítimos” si no se dan garantías de seguridad para las universidades iraníes, informaron medios estatales.

Universidades estadounidenses, incluidas Georgetown, la Universidad de Nueva York y Northwestern, tienen campus en Qatar y Emiratos Árabes Unidos.

“Si el gobierno de Estados Unidos quiere que sus universidades en la región sean eximidas, debería condenar el bombardeo de universidades (iraníes) antes de las 12 del mediodía del lunes 30 de marzo, en una declaración oficial”, dijo la Guardia.

También exigió que Estados Unidos impida que Israel ataque universidades y centros de investigación iraníes. El portavoz del Ministerio iraní de Exteriores Esmaeil Baqaei, dijo la semana pasada que decenas de universidades y centros de investigación han sido alcanzados, entre ellos la Universidad de Ciencia y Tecnología de Irán y la Universidad de Tecnología de Isfahán.

La intervención hutí despierta preocupación

El general de brigada hutí Yahya Saree declaró en la cadena satelital de los rebeldes Al-Masirah que lanzaron misiles hacia “sitios militares israelíes sensibles” en el sur.

Si los hutíes incrementan los ataques contra el transporte marítimo comercial, como han hecho en el pasado, eso empujaría aún más al alza los precios del petróleo y desestabilizaría “toda la seguridad marítima”, señaló Ahmed Nagi, analista principal sobre Yemen del International Crisis Group. “El impacto no se limitaría al mercado energético”.

Bab el-Mandeb, en el extremo sur de la península arábiga, es crucial para los buques que se dirigen al canal de Suez a través del mar Rojo. Arabia Saudí ha estado enviando por allí millones de barriles de crudo al día porque el estrecho de Ormuz está, en la práctica, cerrado.

Los rebeldes hutíes atacaron más de 100 buques mercantes con misiles y drones, hundiendo dos embarcaciones, entre noviembre de 2023 y enero de 2025. El grupo afirmó que actuó en solidaridad con los palestinos en Gaza durante la guerra entre Israel y Hamás.

La más reciente implicación de los hutíes complicaría el despliegue del USS Gerald R. Ford, el portaaviones que llegó a Croacia el sábado para mantenimiento. Enviar el buque al mar Rojo podría atraer ataques similares a los sufridos por el USS Dwight D. Eisenhower en 2024 y el USS Harry S. Truman en 2025.

Los hutíes controlan la capital de Yemen, Saná, desde 2014. Arabia Saudí lanzó una guerra contra los hutíes en nombre del gobierno yemení en el exilio en 2015 y ahora mantienen un alto el fuego inestable.

Aumenta el número de muertos

Las autoridades iraníes dicen que más de 1.900 personas han muerto en la República Islámica, mientras que en Israel se han reportado 19 fallecidos.

En Líbano, donde Israel ha iniciado una invasión en el sur mientras ataca al grupo miliciano Hezbollah, funcionarios dijeron que más de 1.100 personas han muerto en el país desde el inicio de la guerra.

En Irak, donde grupos milicianos respaldados por Irán han entrado en el conflicto, han muerto 80 miembros de las fuerzas de seguridad.

En los estados del Golfo, 20 personas han muerto. Cuatro han muerto en la Cisjordania ocupada.

(con información de AP)

North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un oversaw a test of a new high-thrust solid-fuel rocket engine, according to state media, working on weapons capable of striking the U.S. mainland.

The test, reported Sunday by KCNA, involved an engine made with carbon-fiber materials and was described as part of a new five-year defense plan to upgrade the country’s «strategic strike» capabilities.

Kim said the test had «great significance in putting the country’s strategic military muscle on the highest level,» according to KCNA.

The engine reportedly produced 2,500 kilonewtons of thrust, higher than a similar engine it tested last year. Analysts say such engines could support more mobile or compact long-range missiles.

NORTH KOREAN DICTATOR SAYS GOVERNMENT WILL KEEP CEMENTING NATION’S ‘IRREVERSIBLE STATUS AS A NUCLEAR POWER’

North Korea’s report on the latest test could be «bluffing» as it did not disclose some key information like the engine’s total combustion time, said Lee Choon Geun, an honorary research fellow at South Korea’s Science and Technology Policy Institute.

Solid-fuel systems are significant because they can be launched more quickly and with less warning than older liquid-fuel missiles, making them harder to detect and potentially more survivable in combat.

Pyongyang still faces major technical barriers before fielding a fully reliable intercontinental ballistic missile, especially ensuring a warhead can survive atmospheric reentry.

KIM JONG UN CALLS SOUTH KOREA ‘MOST HOSTILE ENEMY,’ SAYS NORTH COULD ‘COMPLETELY DESTROY’ IT

In this photo released by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency on Sunday, North Korea’s Kim Jong Un observes a ground ejection test in North Korea. (KCNA)

Kim’s latest military activities also included inspections of special operations training and tests of a new main battle tank, underscoring a broader push to modernize both North Korea’s missile program and conventional forces, according to KCNA.

Kim claimed the tank’s protection system could defeat nearly all existing anti-tank weapons, though such assertions could not be independently verified, Reuters reported.

The developments fit a wider pattern of stepped-up military activity by Pyongyang. Since the collapse of Kim’s diplomacy with President Donald Trump in 2019, North Korea has accelerated work on nuclear and missile systems despite sanctions, while keeping open the possibility of talks if Washington drops demands for denuclearization first.

KIM JONG UN APPEARS WITH TEENAGE DAUGHTER AT LIVE-FIRE ROCKET TEST IN NORTH KOREA

North Korea’s Kim Jong Un visits a special operations training base in North Korea on Sunday, according to this picture released by North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency. (KCNA)

At a rare ruling party congress held in February, Kim unveiled a new five-year plan that reaffirmed continued development of nuclear weapons, while calling for a broad upgrade of the country’s military capabilities.

Analysts and regional governments also pointed to new tank and combined-arms drills as part of Pyongyang’s effort to adapt its military doctrine to modern warfare, drawing lessons from recent conflicts and emphasizing integration across ground and missile forces.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

South Korea and the United States say they are closely monitoring North Korea’s weapons developments.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

The Supreme Court is poised to answer a fundamental constitutional question largely ignored for more than a century: Who qualifies as an American citizen?

The justices on Wednesday will hold oral arguments to review President Donald Trump’s efforts to limit birthright citizenship in the U.S., a landmark case with the potential to upend the lives of millions of Americans and lawful residents.

At issue is the executive order the president signed on his first day back in office, which would end automatic citizenship for nearly all persons born in the U.S. to undocumented parents, or parents with lawful temporary status in the country — a seismic legal, political, and social shift that critics note would break with more than 150 years of legal precedent. 

A ruling is expected within three months but until then, Trump’s plans remain on hold.

HOW TO MAKE PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION PAUSE STICK IN COURT

The case is the fourth of a five-part series of appeals the Supreme Court will consider this term on the merits of Trump’s sweeping executive agenda.

The nine-member bench has already tossed out his reciprocal tariffs on most other countries, which relied on an economic emergency law. A separate dispute over ending protections for migrants with temporary protected status will be argued later in April.

Still pending are rulings on the president’s ability to fire members of independent agencies, including Federal Reserve governors.

But the administration has been winning most of the emergency appeals at the Supreme Court since Trump took office again, which dealt only with whether challenged policies could go into effect temporarily, while the issues play out in the lower courts– including immigration, federal spending cuts, workforce reductions, and transgender people in the military.

Constitutional Meaning

Trump’s order now before the high court for final review would reinterpret the 14th Amendment, which states, «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» — a provision the president argues has been misinterpreted.

Executive Order 14160, entitled «Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,» would deny it to those born after February 19, 2025 whose parents are illegal immigrants, or those who were here legally but on temporary non-immigrant visas.

And it bans federal agencies from issuing or accepting documents recognizing citizenship for those children.

«The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift,» says part of the order. «But the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.»

A Supreme Court ruling on the issue could have sweeping national implications for an issue Trump officials argue is a crucial component of his hardline immigration agenda, which has become a defining feature of his second White House term.

BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP SUPPORTERS GET THE LAW WRONG BY IGNORING OBVIOUS EVIDENCE

Demonstrators hold up an anti-Trump sign outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on June 27, 2025.  (ALEX WROBLEWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

In its high court petition, the Trump Justice Department said all lower court decisions handed down last year striking down the executive order had relied on a «mistaken view» with potentially «destructive consequences.»

«The lower courts’ decisions invalidated a policy of prime importance to the president and his administration in a manner that undermines our border security,» said John Sauer, U.S. Solicitor General, who will make the case in person at oral arguments.

«Those decisions confer, without lawful justification, the privilege of American citizenship on hundreds of thousands of unqualified people,» he added.

Opponents argue the effort is unconstitutional and «unprecedented,» and would threaten some 150,000 children in the U.S. born annually to parents of non-citizens, and an estimated 4.6 million American-born children under 18 who are living with an undocumented immigrant parent, according to data from the Pew Research Center.

Separate coalitions of about two dozen states, along with immigrant rights groups, and private individuals — including several pregnant women in Maryland — had filed a class-action lawsuit.

The plaintiffs — including those originally from Taiwan and Brazil — seek to preserve access to citizenship-related benefits including Social Security, SNAP, and Medicaid.

To date, no court has sided with the Trump administration’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment, and blocked the order from taking force.

The ACLU and other immigrant advocacy groups in the U.S., have accused Trump of attempting to «unilaterally rewrite the 14th Amendment.»

«The federal courts have unanimously held that President Trump’s executive order is contrary to the Constitution, a Supreme Court decision from 1898, and a law enacted by Congress,» said ACLU legal director Cecillia Wang, who will argue for the plaintiffs in the courtroom session. «We look forward to putting this issue to rest once and for all in the Supreme Court this term.»

The Arguments

Much of the public session is expected to focus on a phrase in the Constitution that the government asserts limits the citizenship right.

«The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof,’» said Trump’s original order, which the Justice Department essentially interprets as «being subject to U.S. law» — which would give the government discretion to exclude those whose parents are in the country illegally.

But lawyers for the plaintiffs say a century-old Supreme Court ruling affirmed the phrase only excluded automatic citizenship to children born to foreign diplomats or hostile forces.

Supporters of a broad, traditional interpretation point to the 14th Amendment’s origins — passed after the Civil War to end the practice of excluding individuals of African descent, including slaves and free persons, from ever becoming U.S. citizens.

TRUMP ADMIN PUTS KEY BIDEN-ERA IMMIGRATION POLICY ON NOTICE: ‘UNSUSTAINABLE CYCLE’

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a press conference in the James S. Brady Briefing Room at the White House, on June 27, 2025, in Washington D.C., following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that limits the application of birthright citizenship. (Photo by Mehmet Eser / Middle East Images via AFP) (Getty Images)

Thirty-one years after its enactment, the Supreme Court for the first time decided the status of children born in the U.S. to alien parents, creating the precedent of how the Citizenship Clause would be applied in future cases.

Plaintiff Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco and became a cook, but was subject to the Chinese Exclusion Act and denied reentry to the U-S after a trip abroad.

In its landmark ruling, the high court concluded, «A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States… becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.»

The Impact

A recent Pew Research poll asked Americans whether they wanted children of immigrants, temporary immigrants or any immigrants lawfully present in the United States to be citizens, and 94% said yes.

Critics of the administration’s plans fear a chaotic and unfair patchwork of enforcement that would apply in some states and not others, some families and not others, and that it could be sweeping in scope.

«Under the executive order, that child is born a non-citizen,» Amanda Frost, director of the Immigration, Migration and Human Rights Program at the University of Virginia School of Law. «Denied all the benefits and privileges of citizenship and theoretically deportable on day one of their life. And then every single American family having a child will now have to prove their status before that child is considered a citizen by the U.S. government. And that doesn’t matter if they go back to the Mayflower. That’s what everyone will have to prove going forward.»

But immigration reform advocates point to what they call abuses in the system.

JUSTICE JACKSON AUTHORS UNANIMOUS SCOTUS OPINION HANDING TRUMP AN IMMIGRATION WIN

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Associate Justice Brent Kavanaugh and Associate Justice Mary Coney Barrett attend the State of the Union address during a Joint Session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on February 24, 2026, in Washington, DC. ( Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

«That is the exploitation of America’s birthright citizenship policy… particularly those by nationals of the People’s Republic of China,» Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute. «Birth tourism is essentially an industry that provides concierge service at every step of the way for a foreign national, in this case China, to pay the firm roughly $100,000, they will transport them to the United States, arrange medical care, arrange citizenship for the child,» he added. «And as soon as the child is old enough to travel, they will return back to China.»

In oral arguments last May when the Supreme Court first looked at Trump’s birthright citizenship order, many on the bench were skeptical of the Trump administration.

The government’s position «makes no sense whatsoever,» said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, saying it could leave some children «stateless.»

«So as far as I see it, this order violates four Supreme Court precedents,» added Sotomayor. «And you are claiming that not just the Supreme Court, that both the Supreme Court and no lower court can stop an executive from universally violating those holdings by this Court.» 

«On the day after it goes into effect — it’s just a very practical question of how it’s going to work,» asked Justice Brett Kavanaugh. «What do hospitals do with a newborn? What do states do with a newborn?» when it comes to determining citizenship on the birth certificate.

«I don’t think they do anything different,» replied Sauer. «What the executive order says in Section Two is that federal officials do not accept documents that have the wrong designation of citizenship from people who are subject to the executive order.»

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«How are they going to know that?» asked Kavanaugh, shaking his head.  

The case is Trump v. Barbara (25-365), a pseudonym for a Honduran citizen who fears for her and her family’s safety. Her child was born in the U.S. in October, months after she joined the lawsuit as the named plaintiff.