Transcript of Trump Downplays AI Risks, SCOTUS Mail-In Voting Ruling, Kennedy Center Bankruptcy

President Trump is downplaying AI companies' doomsday warnings.

The robots will not be taking over. The AI will not be taking over the rest of the world. The whole thing is a hoax. He's framing the issue as a race against China while selling them the chips they need to develop AI.

I'm Emil Martinez. That's Leila Fadel. And this is Up First from NPR News. The Supreme Court rejected President Trump's push for new mail-in voting restrictions. Voting by mail has already started in several states. What does the ruling mean for midterm elections?

And the Kennedy Center says it's on the brink of bankruptcy. Part of the ceiling collapsed because of rain. NPR obtained an internal memo warning that the building is unsafe and may have to close as soon as today. Meanwhile, the fight over putting Trump's name on it is still in court. Stay with us, we'll give you the news you need to start your day.

Senator Bernie Sanders and President Trump's former top adviser, Steve Bannon— that's right, Bernie Sanders and Steve Bannon are holding a rally together today to highlight concerns about artificial intelligence. AI executives have been talking for the past week about fears that their technology could destroy humanity without guardrails, and they've been calling for Congress to act.

The president disagrees. He made that clear on Monday when he called Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang. Huang was on stage for a taping of the business and technology podcast All In at a conference hosted by that podcast. The robots will not be taking over. The AI will not be taking over the rest of the world. The whole thing is a hoax.

With us is NPR's White House correspondent Emily Fang. So, Emily, what else has President Trump said about AI recently?

He has written a lot on his social media site, Truth Social, this week. He's called criticism of AI and relatedly data centers that help power these AI models a, quote, sick conspiracy that would only benefit China, which is a major AI competitor with US companies. He's brushed off possibility of regulating development of cutting-edge AI, which he called the US's golden goose. And he wrote that fears that AI could take over the world were a hoax and scam. And he's really framed AI as a race against China. And I can briefly summarize his arguments as, if the US doesn't build it, then China is going to do it first. But there's serious debate right now in the global AI industry on whether Chinese companies actually can get ahead of the US on AI, because the US maintains a lead right now, and also whether Beijing really would want to create a super powerful AI that might destroy all of humanity, because arguably that's not in China's interest either.

Oh, sure. Now, thinking about Trump's inauguration a few years ago, I remember a lot of tech CEOs right there, right next to him in attendance and on the donor list. What are Trump's ties to this industry?

A good example is chipmaker Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, who you heard about in the intro. Trump even flew Huang with him during his trip to China this spring. There's also Trump's former AI czar and the co-host of that podcast snippet you heard earlier, hosted by David Sacks. He is a longtime Silicon Valley investor. And these types of connections have certainly shaped Trump's focus on AI as well as the industry's market share in the US. There have been massive investments driving the US economy from the AI industry. And my reporting shows how in the past year, Trump advisors have leaned heavily on academics and think tank researchers and Hill aides to quash analysis that's supportive of stronger export controls against AI. But the intense public debate over AI this month reflects, as I see it, deeply contradictory assumptions that underpin Trump's pro-technology, pro-business stance.

Ooh, what do you mean by that?

Well, for example, last year the Trump administration suspended some AI export controls, and they also allowed Chinese companies to buy a powerful semiconductor chip that's called the H20, with the US government taking a cut of sales. That was despite warnings that China needs these chips specifically to further its AI ambitions. And some of the biggest trade deals inked under Trump's second term have involved US technology that's been included in data centers built in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. And these are US allied countries, but they're also countries that have very strong economic ties with China. And I talked to Chris McGuire about all of this. He's a senior fellow at the nonpartisan think tank Council on Foreign Relations. He's also a former senior director on the National Security Council during the Biden administration.

It doesn't make any sense to say that we have to move as fast as possible in AI in order to beat China while we're also selling China the tech they need to move faster in AI.

And he's speaking here to mounting evidence that Chinese companies are accessing more advanced American AI chips by shipping them through Malaysia in particular.

That's NPR's Emily Fang. Emily, thanks.

Thanks.

The Supreme Court has rejected President Trump's push for new mail-in voting restrictions before the midterms. This new ruling brings some closure to a legal fight that was threatening to disrupt voting by mail— voting that has already started in several states. In a social media post, Trump called the court's decision a, quote, big loss for Republicans, even though voters who cast ballots by mail span the political spectrum. NPR's Hansi Lo Wang has been tracking the court action and joins us now. Good morning, Hansi.

Good morning, Leila.

So what does this new Supreme Court ruling say?

This ruling helps solidify the rules of mail-in voting for the midterm general election. You know, last month there was an earlier Supreme Court ruling that was about a procedural question, but now we have some finality because this new ruling basically says a plan the U.S. Postal Congress came up with to respond to an executive order by President Trump is still blocked. That plan included new mail-in ballot requirements that states would have had to follow in order to get their ballots delivered by USPS, but a federal judge in Boston found those requirements are likely illegal because USPS has no authority to impose them on states. And this new Supreme Court order rejects the Trump administration's request to pause the judge's ruling. And I should note, USPS is a financial supporter of NPR.

So the upshot for voters is that the status quo continues for mail-in voting?

That's right. This ruling means the Postal Service is expected to keep delivering ballots as usual. Voting by mail has already begun in some states like Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, and more states are set to use USPS to mail out their ballots as planned.

Do we have a sense of how the justices voted individually on this ruling?

Well, there was a dissenting opinion from 2 conservative justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas. But conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the court's majority in this ruling, and although Kavanaugh voted to keep the USPS plan blocked, he wrote that he believes there's, quote, at least a fair prospect that USPS does have legal authority to carry out this plan. But Kavanaugh says the Postal Service just doesn't have enough time to do that for the midterms without violating federal law.

To Justice Kavanaugh's point, was it even possible for election officials and USPS to make these changes to mail-in voting for the midterms?

You know, that has been a big question looming over this legal fight. And for months, many legal experts and election experts have said it is too late to put in place these new mail-in ballot requirements. They said it was too late when President Trump put out this executive order back in March, and they said it was certainly too late when USPS finally put out its plan last month, just over a week before the first mail-in ballots for the general election went out. And on top of that, there was a whistleblower report we've talked about, and it claimed that the online system election officials would have needed to use to follow these new ballot requirements has not been properly tested and was set up in a way that could have led to many eligible voters not getting their ballots in time or at all. And it's still not clear if that online system would have been ready to be used if the Supreme Court had ruled in the administration's favor. So there was a real risk of major disruptions and potentially even disabled voters and voters in places without polling sites losing the ability to exercise their right to vote.

But again, that is not happening right now because this USPS plan is blocked for the midterms.

Is there another What's the takeaway for mail-in voters?

Well, there's been a lot of headlines coming out of this legal fight, but the bottom line now is mail-in voting is still available to all eligible voters. USPS is expected to continue delivering ballots as usual. And if you're eligible to vote by mail in your state, your ballot may be on its way to you very soon, if not already. And if you need to request a ballot, it's a good time to check your state's deadline for getting in those requests. And as always, election officials recommend returning your completed ballot as soon as possible.

That's NPR's Hansi Lo Wang. Hansi, thank you.

You're welcome, Leila.

The board of the Kennedy Center says the arts institution is on the brink of bankruptcy.

That's according to documents filed with a federal court on Monday. NPR also obtained a separate memo that the center's administration recently shared with its board, which says the center might be forced to close as soon as today.

NPR culture correspondent Anastasia Siulkas is covering this and joins me now. Good morning.

Good morning, Leila.

So what's changed so suddenly that the center may close today?

So NPR obtained that memo that the Kennedy Center administration recently sent the board, and it says that the complex is, quote, unsafe for continued occupancy. The Kennedy Center board, which of course includes President Trump as its chairman, is still very caught up in federal litigation brought by Representative Joyce Beatty of Ohio. She's a Democrat who's an ex officio member of the board, and she wants to stop these efforts to put Trump's name back on the building. Now, the judge in the suit, Christopher Cooper, had already scheduled a status hearing for later this morning, which essentially is a meeting to set more deadlines and court dates. But the board is also scheduled to meet early this afternoon, and late last night they told the judge that the sole item on their agenda today is, quote, the necessary closure of the center.

What does the Kennedy Center say about all this?

So yesterday, Kennedy Center officials did not respond to my request for comment, but midday yesterday, Beatty's team submitted to the court copies copies of 2 proposed board resolutions, including that discussion of what they say is the dangerous condition of the building that warrants an immediate shutdown. Beatty claims that the construction consultants the board brought in have never said any such thing. The second proposed resolution says the Kennedy Center is in such a, quote, precarious financial position that it will not be able to meet payroll or maintenance contracts within weeks.

Okay, let's take it back a step back for a moment. I mean, most of the center staff have either been fired or left, and those who are still around are largely loyal to the president. And most of the Kennedy Center board was handpicked by President Trump. So is this fight about the name on the building what's behind these warnings now?

Well, certainly the Kennedy Center's argument is that the financials are collapsing, and they have said repeatedly that President Trump is the only person who can fundraise at such a massive scale and can successfully oversee such an extensive renovation project as he's been proposing, they've been proposing. And as such, they're arguing he deserves his name to be on the building. They're also saying that the situation with the physical plant is dire. On September 5th, for example, the center's administration said a portion of the ceiling in the main building's grand foyer collapsed due to rain damage.

What's your understanding of the Kennedy Center's financial status?

Well, let's put it into a larger context. It's a large legacy not-for-profit institution, and those generally depend on 3 legs to their financial stool. One is earned revenue, including selling Tickets and merch. 2 is philanthropic giving, which has fallen off. And 3, some amount of government grants. Now, both artists and audiences have fled the Kennedy Center over the past year-plus, saying it's too politicized. The live event calendar is a fraction of what it used to be. Donations have dried up. So, yes, it seems like there's a real and dire financial crisis. The question now is how to manage it and if doubling down on adding Trump's name is the way to solve that.

That's NPR's Anastasia Sioukas. Thank you.

Thanks for having me.

And that's Up First for Tuesday, September 15th. I'm Leila Fadel.

And I'm Amy Martinez. Today's episode of Up First was edited by Rebecca Metzler, Ben Swayze, Steve Drummond, Mohamed Elbardisi, and Alice Wolfley. It was produced by Ziad Butch and Nia Dumas. Our director is Christopher Thomas. We get engineering support from Zoe Vangenhoven. Our technical director is Carly Strange, and our supervising senior producer is Vince Pearson. Join us again tomorrow.

Wanna hear this podcast without sponsor breaks? Amazon Prime members can listen to Up First sponsor-free through Amazon Music. Or you can also support NPR's vital journalism and get NPR+ at plus.npr.org. That's plus.npr.org.