Trump Says Allies Joining U.S. Patrols to Reopen Strait of Hormuz

Fertilizer update | Beijing warns U.S. on Hong Kong and Taiwan ahead of Trump/Xi summit | Potential strike at JBS Greeley beef plant — market signals and strategic implications

LINKS

Link: Video: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, March 6 (Interview with USDA Deputy Stephen Vaden) 

Link: Audio: Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives, March 6 (Vaden interview)

Updates: Policy/News/Markets, March 14, 2026

UP FRONT

TOP STORIES

Hormuz patrol coalition. Trump said allied countries will join U.S. naval patrols to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, signaling a broader international effort to protect commercial shipping as Iran continues threatening the corridor.

Risky Hormuz options. The Trump administration is weighing difficult military choices — including mine-clearing, naval escorts, and possible island seizures — to restore shipping without triggering a wider regional war.

Beijing sets red lines. China warned the U.S. against actions on Hong Kong and Taiwan ahead of the Trump/Xi summit, underscoring how sensitive Jimmy Lai and any Taiwan arms package remain for Beijing.

Rollins eyes fertilizer relief. USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said the administration is pursuing steps to stabilize fertilizer prices, while sanctions relief for Venezuela is meant to add supply ahead of planting season.

FINANCIAL MARKETS

Stocks end lower for week. Major U.S. indexes fell Friday and posted weekly losses as investors continued to price in war-related energy risks and broader economic uncertainty.

Gold pulls back. Gold fell for the week as a stronger dollar and higher Treasury yields reduced demand for the metal, though prices remain sharply above year-ago levels.

Judge blocks Powell subpoenas. A federal judge stopped DOJ subpoenas targeting the Fed and Chair Jerome Powell, saying the effort appeared tied to political pressure rather than a proper investigative purpose.

AG MARKETS

JBS strike threat rattles cattle trade. A possible March 16 strike at JBS’s Greeley, Colorado, beef plant could disrupt slaughter capacity, pressure cash cattle prices, and tighten beef supplies.

Mixed commodity trade. Grain and livestock markets ended the week mixed, with corn, soy products, cotton, and some wheat contracts stronger, while cattle and hog futures weakened.

FERTILIZER UPDATE

Hawley presses CF Industries. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) is demanding answers from CF Industries over whether recent fertilizer price hikes reflect genuine market stress or war-driven opportunism.

ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY

Oil climbs on Hormuz closure. Crude prices rose again Friday as the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and broader Middle East disruption kept global supply concerns elevated.

SPR release begins. The Trump administration launched an 86-million-barrel emergency oil reserve release as part of a larger coordinated effort to ease the war-driven energy shock.

U.S. oil sector windfall. American oil producers could gain a major profit boost from sustained $100 crude, though analysts say companies are unlikely to respond with a rapid drilling surge.

RFS case thrown out. A federal appeals court dismissed challenges to EPA’s 2020 Renewable Fuel Standards, finding later regulatory and statutory changes made the dispute moot.

FOOD POLICY & FOOD INDUSTRY

White House tightens grip on HHS. The White House is increasing oversight of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s HHS operation after a series of management setbacks and political concerns tied to the MAHA agenda.

TRANSPORTATION & LOGISTICS

Jones Act waiver under review. The administration is considering a temporary Jones Act waiver to ease fuel and goods movement as the Iran war strains shipping and raises domestic supply concerns.

WEATHER

Major storm and severe weather threat. A powerful system is expected to bring heavy snow and strong winds to the northern tier, severe thunderstorms across the central and eastern U.S., and growing heat and fire risk in the West and Plains.

TOP STORIES—Trump says allies joining U.S. patrols to reopen Strait of HormuzPresident urges major economies dependent on global energy flows to deploy warships as conflict with Iran disrupts shipping President Donald Trump said several countries are joining the United States in patrolling the Strait of Hormuz to keep the vital oil-shipping corridor open following Iranian attacks on vessels in the region. In a Truth Social post March 14 (link), Trump said nations affected by Iran’s attempts to disrupt traffic through the strategic waterway will send warships to operate alongside U.S. forces. The president said the patrols are intended to protect commercial shipping and restore safe passage through the strait, which normally carries roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supplies. “Many countries, especially those affected by Iran’s attempted closure of the Hormuz Strait, will be sending war ships, in conjunction with the United States of America, to keep the Strait open and safe,” Trump wrote. Trump did not specify which governments have committed naval assets but said he hopes major economies dependent on global energy flows — including China, France, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom — will participate in the effort. “The U.S. will also coordinate with those Countries so that everything goes quickly, smoothly, and well. This should have always been a team effort, and now it will be — It will bring the World together toward Harmony, Security, and Everlasting Peace!” Trump added. Trump has publicly urged Japan to send naval forces to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, increasing pressure on Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi just days before her planned visit to the White House. Political pressure on Tokyo. Trump’s appeal puts Takaichi in a difficult position domestically and diplomatically. Japan relies heavily on Middle Eastern oil — roughly 95% of its crude imports come from the region, with about 70% passing through the Strait of Hormuz — making the shipping lane critical to the country’s energy security. However, Japan’s pacifist constitution and legal restrictions on overseas military operations complicate any decision to deploy naval forces into an active conflict zone. Even sending advanced minesweepers — a capability Japan possesses — could be controversial unless the mines are legally considered “abandoned” after hostilities end. Analysts say the request represents a major geopolitical test for Japan’s willingness to expand its military role abroad — particularly as tensions in the Middle East intersect with broader U.S. security alliances and energy-market stability. The issue could therefore become a central topic when Takaichi visits Washington, where Trump may press the Japanese leader publicly to contribute more directly to protecting global energy routes. Takaichi is expected to visit the White House on March 19, for a summit with Trump. The announcement comes as the U.S./Israeli war with Iran continues to escalate across the Persian Gulf. Although recent U.S. strikes have significantly degraded Iran’s conventional military capabilities, Trump said Tehran still retains the ability to threaten shipping using smaller asymmetric weapons such as drones, mines, fast attack boats, and short-range missiles launched from its coastline. Iran has long maintained the capability to attack vessels transiting the narrow waterway using mines, submarines, mobile artillery, and shore-based missile systems, raising fears that even a weakened Iranian force could disrupt maritime traffic. Trump said U.S. forces will continue targeting what remains of Iran’s naval infrastructure and military sites along the country’s shoreline while allied patrols attempt to secure shipping routes. The comments came hours after the U.S. ordered strikes on military facilities on Iran’s Kharg Island, a strategic Persian Gulf site responsible for handling nearly all of the country’s oil exports. Trump said the targeted military infrastructure had been “obliterated,” but added that he deliberately avoided striking oil facilities “for reasons of decency,” warning that energy infrastructure could become a target if Iran interferes further with shipping. The Strait of Hormuz normally carries about 20% of global oil supplies, and the conflict has already caused shipping disruptions and pushed crude prices above $100 per barrel. Iran has threatened vessels using drones, mines, and short-range missiles, while the Trump administration is considering naval escorts to reopen the corridor. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the strait was only closed to ships from “enemies,” even as attacks across the region continued. Since the war began Feb. 28 following U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, the conflict has spread across the Gulf, Lebanon, and Israel, leaving roughly 3,750 people dead and multiple energy facilities under threat. The situation intensified further after a drone attack forced the suspension of operations at the UAE’s Fujairah oil port, a key export hub outside the Strait of Hormuz that had been expected to partially bypass the blocked route. Regional governments also reported a surge in missile and drone attacks targeting Gulf states and bases hosting U.S. forces. Despite the strikes on Kharg Island, Iranian oil exports have continued for now, with tankers still observed loading crude. However, analysts warn that a direct strike on the island’s oil infrastructure could halt most Iranian exports and trigger broader retaliation against shipping and energy facilities across the Middle East. The growing confrontation has already rattled global markets, driving oil prices to their highest level in nearly four years and raising concerns about prolonged disruptions to energy supplies and maritime trade. “One way or the other, we will soon get the Hormuz Strait OPEN, SAFE, and FREE,” Trump said.Even once it becomes safe to sail the strait again, it is likely to take weeks or months for oil production to reach prewar levels, the IEA has said.—Trump weighs risky military options to reopen Strait of HormuzMine clearing, naval escorts, and island seizures emerge as possible strategies as Iran threatens global oil supply routes President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are confronting a complex and potentially dangerous set of military and political choices as the U.S. attempts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz following Iranian attacks on oil tankers and regional shipping. The narrow waterway — through which roughly 20% of global oil trade typically passes — has become a central flashpoint in the expanding U.S.-Israeli war with Iran. Rising energy prices and mounting economic risks have intensified pressure on Washington to restore maritime traffic, but experts say each available option carries significant military and political costs. Trump signaled the stakes on Friday when he confirmed the U.S. had conducted heavy strikes on Iran’s Kharg Island, the country’s primary oil export terminal. However, he said he ordered the military not to directly target Iranian oil infrastructure, suggesting the strikes were intended as a warning rather than an escalation. Clearing mines and escorting tankers. One potential strategy involves U.S. naval escorts to guide commercial vessels safely through the strait — a mission that would likely require extensive mine-clearing operations beforehand. Steven Wills, a naval strategist with the Center for Maritime Strategy, warned that removing mines from the waterway would be slow and technically challenging. “It’s hard, it’s messy, you’ve got to sort one mine at a time,” Wills told The Hill. “That’s a more difficult challenge for the Navy to sort, I think.” Iran is believed to possess more than 5,000 naval mines, according to past U.S. intelligence estimates, ranging from simple contact mines to advanced influence mines that detonate based on magnetic or acoustic signatures of passing ships. Despite these risks, Hegseth sought to reassure reporters that the Pentagon has experience handling similar threats. The U.S. military “has been dealing with it,” Hegseth said when asked about the possibility of escorting tankers through the strait. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan Caine said the military’s immediate focus is countering Iran’s mining capability before launching escort operations through what he described as a “tactically complex environment.” Drone threats complicate naval strategy. Beyond mines, analysts warn Iran’s use of drones poses another serious challenge for U.S. naval operations. Erik Bethel, a maritime security expert and U.S. Naval Academy graduate, said the asymmetric nature of Iranian attacks complicates the task of protecting shipping. “It’s not that we don’t have the best Navy in the world,” Bethel told The Hill. “It’s that we face asymmetric actions from our adversaries.” “We’re shooting down $50,000 drones with multi-million dollar missiles,” he added. “It only takes one or two kamikaze drone boats or aerial drones to cause damage.” Iran’s Shahed-136 attack drones — capable of traveling hundreds of miles — are seen by some experts as a particularly difficult threat to neutralize. Possible seizure of strategic islands. Another option under discussion involves deploying U.S. forces to strategic islands along the Strait of Hormuz to counter Iranian attacks without launching a full ground invasion of Iran. Bryan Clark of the Hudson Institute said U.S. forces could seize Iranian-controlled islands just offshore and use them to monitor and strike threats along the coastline. “On the Iranian side there’s some islands that are just offshore and you could land troops ashore there, take control of that territory and then essentially use them to engage any threats,” Clark told The Hill. Such an operation could involve roughly 2,500 Marines and several warships reportedly moving toward the region from the Indo-Pacific. However, Clark noted that establishing positions on the barren islands would require troops to transport all supplies and equipment, making it a complicated expeditionary mission. “In theory the Iranians would oppose that landing so there may be some damage and casualties,” Clark said. Kharg Island as a pressure point. Some analysts argue the most decisive option would be capturing or neutralizing Kharg Island, which handles about 90% of Iran’s oil exports. Control of the facility could give the U.S. leverage to pressure Tehran into halting attacks on shipping routes. But such an operation would represent a major escalation of the conflict and could risk additional American casualties — particularly after 13 U.S. service members have already been killed during the broader war. War aims complicate diplomatic path. A diplomatic settlement remains another theoretical route to reopening the strait. However, that option would likely leave the Iranian regime intact and its nuclear program unresolved — an outcome that could conflict with Trump’s stated war goals. Retired Vice Adm. Kevin Donegan said Iran’s ability to disrupt shipping may already be weakening as the conflict progresses. “Not that some don’t get through and they can’t hit civilian targets,” Donegan told The Hill. “But you’ll see that their ability to do that is diminishing.” Still, he cautioned that even limited mining efforts could disrupt shipping. “The ability to throw mines here and there out of a simple boat is not a hard task,” Donegan said. Global economic stakes rising. With oil prices surging amid the conflict — and global markets closely watching the Strait of Hormuz — the pressure on Washington to restore shipping flows is mounting. For the Trump administration, the challenge is finding a solution that reopens the vital trade corridor without triggering a broader regional war — a balance that military analysts say will be increasingly difficult as the conflict drags on. When asked how long the war might last, Trump offered a characteristically blunt answer in a Fox News interview. “When I feel it,” Trump said. “When I feel it in my bones.”  Trump Weighs Military Options to Reopen the Strait of Hormuz The Trump administration has indicated it plans to escort oil tankers through the strait using U.S. naval vessels, potentially joined by allied fleets. However, the narrow passage — only about 21 miles wide at its tightest point — leaves ships highly vulnerable to Iranian anti-ship missiles, drones, naval mines, and swarms of fast attack boats.  Escort operations would require a large naval commitment. Under a convoy strategy, U.S. warships would accompany commercial tankers through the strait while clearing mines and defending against Iranian attacks from land, air, and sea. Military analysts estimate the mission would require two warships per tanker, meaning roughly a dozen naval vessels could be needed to protect convoys of five to ten ships at a time. The operation would also require persistent aerial surveillance and strike capability, including MQ-9 Reaper drones to target Iranian missile launchers along the coastline. Even then, the risks would remain high. Iran’s mobile missile systems and drones can be repositioned quickly, allowing Tehran to launch hit-and-run attacks despite weeks of U.S. and Israeli strikes that have degraded parts of Iran’s military. The scale of the effort would be significant. Experts say escort operations could require thousands of sailors and soldiers, as well as months of sustained deployment. As noted previously, Trump has called on other countries with a stake in global energy flows — including China, France, and the United Kingdom — to contribute naval forces to the mission. Shipping through the Gulf could remain severely limited. Even if convoy operations begin, shipping analysts warn that traffic through the strait would remain far below normal levels. According to shipping intelligence firm Lloyd’s List, security restrictions and limited escort capacity could reduce tanker traffic to as little as 10% of its typical volume. That would slow efforts to clear the more than 600 commercial vessels currently backed up in the Persian Gulf.The risk of Iranian attacks could also deter commercial shippers and insurers from returning to the route. Ground operations present a far riskier option. A more aggressive option under discussion would involve U.S. ground forces seizing territory along Iran’s southern coastline to prevent Tehran from launching attacks on ships.Such an operation would likely begin with intensive airstrikes against Iranian missile sites and drone bases, followed by amphibious landings by U.S. Marines to destroy remaining launch systems. However, analysts say this would effectively amount to a limited invasion of Iran, requiring thousands of troops and potentially months of operations in rugged terrain. U.S. forces would face threats from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) — a force of roughly 190,000 personnel — as well as Iran’s experienced Quds Force, which specializes in asymmetric warfare. Even if U.S. troops controlled parts of the coast, Iran could still launch missiles or drones from deeper inland. A military solution may not fully restore shippingExperts warn that even successful military operations may not fully reopen the strait. Iran has already conducted dozens of attacks on shipping since the conflict began, including strikes on vessels hundreds of miles from the chokepoint. As a result, commercial shipping companies and insurers may remain reluctant to transit the Gulf unless hostilities end. Ultimately, analysts say a diplomatic settlement with Tehran may be the only way to restore normal traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, where more than 100 ships typically pass each day in peacetime.   —Beijing warns U.S. on Hong Kong and Taiwan ahead of Trump/Xi summitChina signals red lines on Jimmy Lai case and potential Taiwan arms package before President Donald Trump’s March visit China on Friday warned Washington against taking actions related to Hong Kong or Taiwan ahead of President Donald Trump’s planned visit to China from March 31 to April 2, underscoring the sensitivity surrounding the upcoming Trump/Xi summit. Speaking at a regular press briefing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun condemned U.S. calls for the release of jailed Hong Kong media figure Jimmy Lai, insisting Lai “should be severely punished according to the law” and accusing outside powers of interfering in China’s internal affairs. Lai — the founder of the now-defunct Apple Daily newspaper — was sentenced last month to 20 years in prison on national security charges. The United States and Britain have repeatedly urged Beijing to release the 78-year-old on humanitarian grounds. Beijing also reiterated strong opposition to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, warning Washington to abide by the “one-China principle” and the three U.S.–China joint communiqués. Guo urged the U.S. to halt weapons transfers and “take concrete actions to safeguard the stable development of China/U.S. relations and peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.” The warning comes after reports that the Trump administration could approve a $14 billion arms package for Taiwan, potentially the largest ever, after Trump’s China visit. Beijing has previously condemned similar sales as violations of Chinese sovereignty and has responded with military exercises near the island. The dispute highlights the geopolitical tensions surrounding the Trump-Xi meeting, even as both sides prepare for high-level talks aimed at stabilizing the broader U.S./China relationship. —Rollins signals federal action on fertilizer prices as U.S. taps Venezuela supplyAdministration moves to boost fertilizer availability ahead of planting season as Iran war disrupts global nitrogen trade USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said Friday that the Trump administration is actively pursuing options to stabilize fertilizer prices and ensure adequate supply for American farmers — while the White House simultaneously moved to ease sanctions to allow fertilizer imports from Venezuela. Rollins said the administration is examining “every potential avenue” to keep fertilizer costs from spiking ahead of the spring planting season and indicated that additional measures could be announced soon. The policy push comes as fertilizer markets tighten sharply due to disruptions in the Middle East conflict. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz — a critical route for global nitrogen fertilizer exports — has been severely disrupted, pushing prices higher worldwide and raising concerns about shortages just weeks before U.S. corn and soybean planting begins. Venezuela sanctions eased to increase fertilizer supply. In a related move Friday, the Trump administration expanded sanctions waivers on Venezuela, allowing U.S. companies to purchase Venezuelan petrochemical products — including fertilizer — for import into the United States. The U.S. Treasury Department issued updated general licenses that:• Allow fertilizer exports from Venezuela to the U.S.• Permit U.S. firms to provide goods, services, and technology to support Venezuela’s electricity and petrochemical sectors• Enable negotiations for future investment in Venezuelan energy and petrochemical production Besides the fertilizer measure, the Treasury Department issued a license allowing work on Venezuela’s power grid, a crucial step toward revitalizing the oil sector and other industries while improving the lives of people across the country who deal with persistent outages. The administration said the fertilizer step is intended to help stabilize commodity markets and support American farmers facing rising input costs. A Treasury official said the authorizations will “allow for the export of fertilizer directly to the U.S. to support our great American farmers.” The decision also reflects a broader effort by the Trump administration to cushion the domestic economy from the inflationary impact of the Iran war, which has pushed up oil and fertilizer prices globally. Fertilizer markets tightening rapidly. The urgency around fertilizer supply reflects the speed of the market disruption. According to industry reporting:• Fertilizer prices have surged more than 30% since the conflict escalated.• Some U.S. regions are reporting shortfalls in urea supplies, a key nitrogen fertilizer.• More than 30% of globally traded nitrogen fertilizer normally moves through the Strait of Hormuz, making the conflict particularly disruptive to supply chains.• New Orleans prices for urea, which is widely applied to U.S. corn fields, are up 28% since the war on Iran started through Friday, according to Bloomberg Green Markets. The U.S. imports over a third of its urea from the Middle East, according to The Fertilizer Institute.• Retail fertilizer dealers in North America have warned that inventories are tightening quickly as farmers prepare for the 2026 crop year. Fertilizer impact limited, for now. “It’s going to take a little bit of investment, a little bit of time to get those facilities back to their former selves,” Josh Linville, vice president for fertilizers at brokerage StoneX Group, said, adding that he doesn’t see the country being a big exporter into the U.S. market short-term. The country’s oil sector also doesn’t have the infrastructure to supplement flows, said Jeremy Paner, a partner at Hughes Hubbard & Reed, a Washington-based international law firm. Additional policy options under review. Rollins did not detail specific programs Friday, but officials and lawmakers are discussing several additional responses:• Monitoring fertilizer pricing amid concerns about potential price gouging.• Additional farm assistance tied to war-related economic disruptions.• Supply diversification, including imports from new or previously restricted suppliers such as Venezuela. Industry analysts note that while Venezuelan fertilizer output has declined over the years, the move could still provide incremental supply relief at a critical moment in the planting season. Bottom line: The Trump administration is combining policy intervention and supply diversification to address the fertilizer shock hitting U.S. agriculture. While Secretary Rollins signaled that more measures could follow, the immediate step was loosening sanctions to allow Venezuelan fertilizer exports to the United States, aimed at easing supply pressures ahead of the spring planting season.

FINANCIAL MARKETS

—Equities Friday and weekly change: 

Equity Index	Closing Price  March 13	Point Difference  from March 12	% Difference  from March 12	Weekly Change
Dow	46,558.47	-119.38	-0.26%	-1.99%
Nasdaq	22,105.36	-206.62	-0.93%	-1.26%
S&P 500	6,632.19	-40.43	-0.61%	-1.60%

—Gold retreats as stronger dollar and rising treasury yields weigh on prices. Gold declined approximately 2%–3% for the week, falling from roughly $5,200 to about $5,033–$5,096 by Friday. The U.S. dollar index climbed to its highest level of 2026, directly competing with gold for safe-haven flows amid global market uncertainty.

Rising Treasury yields also pressured the metal. The yield on the 10-year Treasury increased to 4.28%, up from about 3.97% before the war began, raising the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets such as gold.

Despite the weekly decline, gold remains up more than 25% compared with a year ago. Major banks continue to maintain bullish long-term forecasts, with J.P. Morgan projecting prices could reach $6,300 and Deutsche Bank targeting $6,000 in 2026.

The metal’s record of $5,602.22, set on Jan. 28, was not challenged during the week.

—Judge blocks DOJ subpoenas targeting Federal Reserve, Powell

Court finds Justice Department effort tied to pressure campaign amid tensions between President Trump and the central bank

A federal judge has blocked Justice Department subpoenas seeking records from the Federal Reserve and its chair, Jerome Powell, ruling the requests were improperly motivated and could not be enforced.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg quashed two grand jury subpoenas served on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors that sought documents related to a $2.5 billion renovation of the Fed’s headquarters. The investigation was launched earlier this year after Powell testified before the Senate Banking Committee about the need to modernize the central bank’s historic Marriner S. Eccles and Federal Reserve Board East buildings.

In his ruling, Boasberg said there was “abundant evidence” the subpoenas were issued as part of a broader campaign to pressure Powell amid ongoing tensions between the White House and the Federal Reserve. “The case thus asks: Did prosecutors issue those subpoenas for a proper purpose?” Boasberg wrote. “The Court finds that they did not.”

The judge further concluded that the “dominant (if not sole) purpose” of the subpoenas appeared to be harassment aimed at forcing Powell either to align with President Donald Trump or step down as Fed chair.

The dispute centers on the cost of a long-planned renovation of the Fed’s headquarters complex in Washington. The project — covering buildings constructed in the 1930s and never previously renovated — was originally estimated at $1.9 billion, but later rose to about $2.5 billion due to design changes, higher construction costs, and unforeseen structural issues.

Despite the ruling blocking the subpoenas, the Justice Department signaled the broader investigation remains active. Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said prosecutors are examining potential false-statement or fraud allegations tied to the renovation project. Pirro emphasized that any potential charges would ultimately depend on the grand jury’s determination.

The court’s decision marks the latest flashpoint in the escalating conflict between the Trump administration and the Federal Reserve over monetary policy and the independence of the central bank.

AG MARKETS

—Potential strike at JBS Greeley beef plant — market signals and strategic implications

Workers could launch the first major U.S. meatpacking strike in decades beginning March 16 as labor negotiations stall and the cattle market watches closely

Situation Overview

• Nearly 3,800–4,000 union workers at the JBS beef plant in Greeley, Colorado have authorized a strike.

• Workers represented by United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7.

• Earliest potential strike date: 5:30 a.m. MT Monday, March 16, 2026, according to the union’s formal notice to the company (7:30 am ET).

• Dispute centers on wages, healthcare costs, safety equipment charges, and alleged unfair labor practices.

• The facility processes ~5,000–6,000 cattle per day, making it one of the largest beef plants in the U.S.

Why the Greeley Plant Matters

• Accounts for roughly 7–8% of U.S. daily fed-cattle slaughter capacity.

• Major buyer of cattle from feedlots in: Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Wyoming

• Disruption would immediately affect regional cattle marketing and national beef supply.

Current Industry Context

• U.S. cattle herd at multi-decade lows, tightening supplies.

• Several beef plants closed since 2023 (including Tyson Lexington and Cargill Plainview).

• Remaining plants carry greater market influence over cattle prices.

Immediate Market Impacts if Strike Occurs

Cattle Market

• Fewer slaughter slots available.

• Cash cattle prices likely weaken initially.

• Feedlots may experience delayed marketings and heavier cattle weights.

Beef Market

• Reduced slaughter tightens supply.

• Boxed beef prices typically rise.

Futures Markets

• Live cattle futures may sell off initially.

• Feeder cattle likely follow.

“Processing Bottleneck” Dynamic. Typical response to major packing disruptions:

Market Likely Reaction

Cash cattle           ↓ Lower

Boxed beef           ↑ Higher

Packer margins ↑ Wider

Reason:

• Less slaughter demand for cattle

• But tighter beef supply for retailers.

Industry Concentration. Four companies dominate U.S. slaughter capacity:

1) JBS

2) Tyson Foods

3) Cargill

4) Marfrig

Combined control roughly 80–85% of fed-cattle slaughter capacity.

Implication: Disruption at one large plant can move national markets.

Signals JBS May Be Preparing for a Strike. Industry sources report several operational adjustments:

• Redirecting cattle deliveries to other JBS plants if necessary.

• Greater flexibility in slaughter bookings.

• Possible boxed beef inventory building before any shutdown.

These actions are standard contingency planning for processors.

Alternative Plants That Could Absorb Volume. JBS U.S. beef network includes:

• Grand Island, Nebraska

• Cactus, Texas

• Hyrum, Utah

These facilities could potentially absorb some slaughter volume if Greeley operations halt.

Impacts:

• Longer cattle transport distances

• Regional bid shifts in cattle markets.

What Traders Are Watching. Key indicators ahead of March 16:

• Cash cattle bids in Colorado and Kansas

• Forward slaughter bookings

• Boxed beef cutout prices

• Live cattle futures reaction

These signals often move before a strike officially begins.

Bottom Line

• Earliest strike start: March 16, 2026, at 5:30 a.m. MT (7:30 a.m. ET)

• Greeley is one of the most important plants in the U.S. cattle system.

• A strike could temporarily weaken cattle prices while lifting beef prices.

• Market participants are watching packer procurement behavior and slaughter schedules for signals of how the situation may unfold.

—Agriculture markets Friday and weekly change:

Commodity	Contract Month	Closing Price March 13	Change from March 12	Weekly Change
Corn	May	4.67 1/4	+4 3/4¢	+6 3/4¢
Soybeans	May	12.25 1/4	-2¢	+24 1/2¢
Soybean Meal	May	$322.70	+$2.50	+$5.50
Soybean Oil	May	67.44¢	+2 pts	+86 pts
SRW Wheat	May	6.13 3/4	+15 1/4¢	-3¢
HRW Wheat	May	6.30	+16 1/2¢	+6 1/2¢
Spring Wheat	May	6.45 1/2	+11¢	-1/2¢
Cotton	May	65.85¢	+71 pts	+165 pts
Live Cattle	April	$230.90	-$0.35	-$3.675
Feeder Cattle	March	$349.475	+$1.25	-$6.15
Lean Hogs	April	$93.45	-$0.90	-$2.175

FERTILIZER UPDATE

—Sen. Hawley probes fertilizer price spike amid Iran war

Missouri Republican questions CF Industries over whether recent fertilizer price increases are justified by market conditions or tied to war-related speculation

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) is pressing CF Industries Holdings for answers about a recent surge in fertilizer prices, raising concerns that the ongoing U.S.–Israel war with Iran may be used to justify increases that go beyond underlying market fundamentals.

In a letter (link) sent to CEO Christopher Bohn, Hawley questioned the company about what he described as a “sudden increase in fertilizer prices for American farmers over the last two weeks.” The senator posted the letter publicly on social media and asked the nitrogen fertilizer giant to explain whether the price moves reflect legitimate cost pressures or opportunistic pricing tied to geopolitical turmoil.

Hawley warned that Congress would scrutinize the company’s actions if the increases are not supported by market conditions. “If CF Industries is using the Iran war as a pretext to raise prices beyond what market conditions justify, Congress will not ignore it,” Hawley wrote.

The senator requested detailed information on recent fertilizer pricing decisions, including how global energy markets, supply disruptions, and wartime risks may have influenced the company’s pricing strategy. CF 

Industries has been given until March 27 to respond to the inquiry.

Fertilizer markets under geopolitical pressure. The congressional inquiry comes as global fertilizer markets react to the broader economic shock from the Iran conflict, particularly the surge in energy prices and supply-chain disruptions tied to instability in the Persian Gulf.

Nitrogen fertilizer production is heavily dependent on natural gas, and higher global energy prices — driven in part by the conflict and the disruption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz — can quickly feed into fertilizer production costs. However, lawmakers and farm groups are closely watching whether price increases are proportional to those cost changes.

The issue is especially sensitive for U.S. farmers heading into the 2026 planting season, as fertilizer remains one of the largest input costs for crop production.

Political and farm-sector implications. Hawley’s inquiry signals that fertilizer pricing could become a broader political issue as the war continues to ripple through agricultural markets. Congressional scrutiny of fertilizer companies intensified during the 2022–2023 period of global price spikes, when lawmakers questioned whether concentrated industry structure amplified price volatility.

For producers and farm organizations, the concern is that another rapid rise in fertilizer prices — particularly nitrogen — could squeeze margins just as energy-driven inflation is already raising fuel and transportation costs. The letter also reflects growing attention in Washington to how wartime supply shocks are filtering through agricultural input markets — an issue likely to remain in focus if the Iran conflict continues to disrupt global energy and shipping flows.

ENERGY MARKETS & POLICY

—Oil prices climb as Hormuz closure tightens global supply

Oil prices moved higher Friday as the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz and widening supply disruptions across the Middle East supported global crude markets, with analysts warning that the weekend could bring further escalation in the conflict.

Brent crude settled at $103.14 per barrel, rising $2.68 (2.67%). 

U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) closed at $98.71, up $2.98 (3.11%). 

Both benchmarks extended gains after surging more than 9% in the previous session and are now trading near their highest levels since 2022.

Prices briefly dipped earlier in the session following an incorrect report that an Indian-flagged tanker had successfully sailed through the Strait of Hormuz. When it was clarified that the vessel had departed from Oman and had not actually transited the strait, crude prices quickly rebounded and continued climbing through midday trading.

Markets remain focused on the ongoing shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow shipping corridor that normally carries roughly 20% of global oil supply. Concerns intensified after reports that Iran may have deployed naval mines in the waterway, potentially complicating efforts by the United States and allied navies to reopen the route.

To ease supply pressure, the Trump administration issued a temporary 30-day license allowing buyers to purchase Russian oil cargoes stranded at sea, affecting an estimated 100 million barrels of crude. The step comes alongside the U.S. plan to release 172 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, part of a broader 400 million-barrel coordinated release by members of the International Energy Agency aimed at stabilizing energy markets.

Despite those interventions, analysts caution that prolonged shipping disruptions or additional damage to regional oil infrastructure could keep global supplies tight and crude prices elevated in the weeks ahead.

—U.S. launches massive emergency oil reserve release

Trump administration begins 86-million-barrel draw down from Strategic Petroleum Reserve as part of global effort to ease war-driven energy shock

The Trump administration has begun the process of releasing 86 million barrels of crude oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), part of a broader 172-million-barrel emergency drawdown announced earlier in the week to counter surging energy prices tied to the U.S.-Israel conflict with Iran.

According to the Department of Energy, the oil will be made available through an exchange program in which companies borrow crude from the reserve and later return it with additional barrels as a premium. Deliveries from the SPR are expected to begin reaching the market by the end of next week, with the full release taking about four months to complete.

The action is part of a coordinated international effort totaling roughly 400 million barrels, aimed at stabilizing global markets after the war disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint that normally carries about 20% of the world’s oil supply.

Officials say the administration plans to replenish the reserve with roughly 200 million barrels within a year, about 20% more than the amount withdrawn. The move also comes amid mounting political pressure on President Donald Trump to address rising fuel prices ahead of the November midterm elections.

—U.S. oil producers poised for $63 billion windfall from Gulf crisis

Middle East disruption and $100-per-barrel crude could deliver major profit surge for American energy companies

American oil producers are positioned to reap an estimated $63 billion windfall this year if crude prices average around $100 per barrel, as geopolitical disruptions in the Persian Gulf tighten global supply and drive energy prices sharply higher.

The potential profit surge reflects the dramatic shift in global energy markets since the U.S.–Israel conflict with Iran escalated and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz — which normally carries roughly 20% of global oil supply — has been severely disrupted.

Price surge boosts U.S. producers. Higher oil prices immediately translate into stronger revenue for U.S. producers, particularly those operating in the Permian Basin, Bakken, and other shale regions, where production costs are often far below $100 per barrel.

According to analysis cited by the Financial Times, the spike in crude prices could generate roughly $63 billion in additional cash flow for American oil companies if prices remain near current levels through the year.

Because U.S. producers now account for a large share of global supply, the country is uniquely positioned to benefit from price shocks that historically harmed the American economy.

U.S. now insulated from classic oil shocks. The United States’ transformation into the world’s largest oil producer has altered the economic impact of energy spikes. In past decades, higher oil prices mainly hurt the U.S. economy by raising fuel costs and widening trade deficits.

Today, however, the country is a major petroleum exporter, meaning rising crude prices shift income toward domestic energy companies and producing states. As a result, a portion of the economic pain felt by consumers through higher gasoline and diesel prices is offset by increased revenue flowing into U.S. oil producers and oil-producing regions.

Who benefits the most. The biggest beneficiaries of a sustained $100 oil environment would likely include:

• Large U.S. shale producers in the Permian Basin

• Independent exploration companies with low production costs

• Oil-producing states such as Texas, New Mexico, Alaska, and Wyoming

• Energy investors and royalty holders tied to shale production

For example, energy-dependent states such as New Mexico already collect billions in oil-related revenue each year, and higher prices could significantly increase tax receipts and budget surpluses.

Constraints on a production surge. Despite the financial incentive, analysts say U.S. producers are unlikely to dramatically ramp up drilling in the near term. Several factors limit rapid supply expansion:

• Investor pressure to prioritize dividends and share buybacks

• Labor and equipment shortages in the oilfield services sector

• Hedging strategies that lock in lower prices for some producers

• Uncertainty about how long the Middle East disruption will last

This disciplined approach means much of the windfall will likely flow directly into profits and shareholder returns, rather than a massive new drilling boom.

Market and political implications. The redistribution created by higher energy prices could have significant economic and political consequences. While oil companies and producing states benefit, consumers face higher gasoline, diesel, and heating costs, contributing to broader inflation pressures and complicating monetary policy decisions for the Federal Reserve.

With Brent crude already trading near or above $100 per barrel amid the Gulf crisis, energy markets remain extremely sensitive to developments around the Strait of Hormuz and the broader U.S./Iran conflict.

—Court dismisses challenge to EPA’s 2020 Renewable Fuel Standards

D.C. Circuit says later regulatory changes and new statutory framework make industry petitions moot

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Friday dismissed legal challenges to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2020 renewable fuel standards, ruling that the dispute has become moot due to significant regulatory and statutory changes since the case was filed.

In an opinion written by Judge Bradley N. Garcia, the court said petitions brought by Growth Energy and the Clean Fuels Alliance America could no longer be adjudicated because the legal landscape surrounding the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program had “materially changed” while the litigation was pending.

Regulatory changes overtook the dispute. The petitions challenged EPA’s 2020 approach to administering small refinery exemptions under the RFS program — a system that requires refiners and fuel importers to blend specified volumes of renewable fuels into the U.S. fuel supply each year.

Under the program, the EPA establishes annual percentage standards that determine how much renewable fuel obligated parties must introduce into the market. The statute also allows small refineries to request economic hardship exemptions from these blending requirements.

Industry groups argued that EPA’s handling of exemptions in the 2020 rule effectively reduced renewable fuel blending by nearly 5 billion gallons, undermining the intent of the RFS statute.

However, the appeals court said those claims are no longer justiciable because subsequent policy changes and statutory revisions have superseded the contested rule.

2022 EPA rule replaced the contested policy. While the litigation was on hold, EPA issued a 2022 rule that recalculated renewable fuel percentage standards for earlier compliance years, including 2020. That rule also revisited and revised the agency’s methodology for determining the blending percentages.

Refiners challenged the 2022 rule in separate litigation, but the D.C. Circuit upheld EPA’s approach in 2024, further altering the regulatory landscape surrounding the program. Because the newer rule replaced the policy that Growth Energy and Clean Fuels Alliance sought to challenge, the court concluded there was no longer a live controversy to resolve.

“The argument that the petitions are moot has substantial force,” the opinion said.

Statutory revisions further undercut the claims. The court also emphasized that changes to the statutory framework governing the RFS program have weakened the petitioners’ legal arguments.

New legislative provisions now give EPA broader authority to set renewable fuel volume obligations, which the court said are “at minimum in tension” with the petitioners’ interpretation of how the agency must handle small refinery exemptions. Even if the policy at issue had remained unchanged, the court said, the applicable law governing the RFS program had shifted enough to render the original dispute obsolete.

Why the decision matters. Although procedural, the ruling effectively closes the door on one of the lingering disputes over EPA’s earlier handling of RFS small refinery exemptions, an issue that has been a major flashpoint between biofuel producers and petroleum refiners. The decision also underscores how rapid policy shifts in the RFS program — particularly the 2022 “reset” rule and statutory revisions — have reshaped the legal framework governing renewable fuel mandates, making older disputes increasingly irrelevant.

FOOD POLICY & FOOD INDUSTRY

— White House tightens oversight of RFK Jr.’s HHS after MAHA setbacks

Administration increases control over messaging and management at the health department as internal frustrations grow ahead of midterm elections

The White House has moved to exert tighter oversight over the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., amid concerns inside the Trump administration about management missteps and political risks tied to his “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) agenda, according to an exclusive report by the Wall Street Journal.

According to the Journal, senior aides to President Donald Trump have begun taking a more active role in guiding HHS messaging and policy — particularly on vaccines — after polling indicated that some of Kennedy’s positions could be politically damaging as Republicans head toward the midterm elections. The intervention reflects growing frustration among some administration officials with what they view as disorganization inside the department and a series of policy missteps over the past year.

Despite those concerns, Kennedy remains in good standing with Trump personally, people familiar with the relationship told the Journal. The president has publicly praised the health secretary and values having a member of the prominent Democratic Kennedy family in his Republican administration.

White House installs stronger management inside HHS. A central component of the White House’s effort has been elevating Chris Klomp, the administration’s Medicare chief and a close Trump ally, to serve as Kennedy’s No. 2 at HHS. According to the Journal, Klomp has been given broad authority to improve the department’s day-to-day management and ensure that Kennedy focuses on White House-approved priorities.

Klomp gained favor inside the administration after helping negotiate the White House’s high-profile drug-pricing agreements with pharmaceutical companies. The White House sees those negotiations — along with healthy-eating initiatives tied to MAHA — as politically advantageous issues that could resonate with voters ahead of the midterms.

An HHS spokesman defended the changes, telling the Journal that strengthening the department’s management reflects expanding responsibilities under Kennedy’s agenda.

Series of controversies triggered shake-up. The move toward tighter White House control follows several internal controversies and policy disputes that frustrated administration officials.

Among them, according to the Journal:

• Kennedy’s initial response to a measles outbreak in Texas was viewed inside the administration as too slow.

• The Food and Drug Administration’s approval of a generic abortion pill caught senior HHS officials by surprise.

• Cuts to mental-health and substance-abuse grants in January sparked bipartisan backlash on Capitol Hill and were quickly reversed.

• Ongoing disputes inside the FDA created repeated headaches for the administration.

To assess the department’s internal problems, the White House commissioned a review led by Brad Smith, a veteran of the administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative. The review recommended management changes intended to reduce infighting and streamline operations.

As part of the resulting shake-up, Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill was pushed out of his role and removed as acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. O’Neill has since been nominated to lead the National Science Foundation.

Policy tensions with Trump agenda. Tensions have also emerged between Kennedy’s activist background and broader administration priorities.

One flashpoint came when Trump signed an executive order boosting domestic production of glyphosate, the widely used herbicide, on national-security grounds. Kennedy has long criticized glyphosate and previously litigated against manufacturers over alleged health risks.

According to the Journal, Kennedy was informed in advance and ultimately supported the order publicly after working with White House staff on his statement — though he later told a podcast he was not pleased with the decision.

Political stakes ahead of midterms. The White House’s intervention underscores the political stakes surrounding health policy heading into the midterms.

While Trump initially promised Kennedy wide latitude to pursue the MAHA agenda — famously telling him to “go wild on health” — aides now appear focused on narrowing the department’s priorities to issues the administration views as more politically advantageous, particularly drug pricing and consumer health initiatives.

Still, the Journal reports that Trump continues to back Kennedy personally, suggesting the changes are intended to stabilize HHS operations rather than signal an imminent leadership change. Potential successors are nevertheless being discussed in Washington policy circles, with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz frequently mentioned as a possible future candidate if Kennedy were to step aside.

TRANSPORTATION & LOGISTICS

—Trump weighs Jones Act waiver as Iran war disrupts energy shipping

Administration considers suspending century-old maritime rule to ease fuel supply constraints and stabilize prices amid global oil shock

The Trump administration is evaluating whether to temporarily waive the Jones Act as the war involving Iran continues to disrupt global oil shipments and push energy prices sharply higher. Officials say the move could help ease domestic supply bottlenecks by allowing foreign-flagged ships to transport energy and other goods between U.S. ports — a step designed to keep fuel and key commodities moving despite maritime disruptions in the Middle East.

What the Jones Act does. The Jones Act, formally known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, requires that cargo transported between U.S. ports travel on ships that are built in the United States, owned by Americans, flagged in the U.S., and crewed by U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

Congress enacted the law after World War I to rebuild the U.S. merchant fleet and ensure the country maintained a domestic shipping capability for national security purposes. Supporters — including maritime unions, shipbuilders, and national security advocates — argue the law protects American maritime jobs and ensures the U.S. has vessels available during wartime.

However, critics contend the requirement raises shipping costs because U.S.-flagged vessels are significantly more expensive to build and operate than foreign ships. Those higher transportation costs can ripple through supply chains, particularly for fuel shipments and cargo deliveries to coastal regions and island territories such as Hawaii and Puerto Rico.

Why the administration is considering a waiver. The potential waiver comes as the Iran war has severely strained global energy logistics. Tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — a route that normally carries roughly 20% of global oil exports — has been sharply curtailed, driving crude prices toward $100 per barrel and pushing U.S. gasoline prices higher.

With shipping disruptions intensifying, the White House has been examining multiple measures to stabilize energy markets. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said a temporary Jones Act waiver is under review to ensure “vital energy products and agricultural necessities are flowing freely to U.S. ports.” President Donald Trump acknowledged the possibility in a Fox News Radio interview, describing the law as a “restrictive act” while noting it still has strong support in Congress.

A waiver could allow foreign vessels to move crude oil, refined fuel, or other cargo between U.S. ports — potentially expanding transport capacity at a time when global shipping routes are constrained.

Potential impact on fuel prices. Analysts say a Jones Act waiver could offer limited relief, but it would not dramatically reduce gasoline prices. Some studies suggest allowing foreign ships to transport fuel between U.S. ports could lower East Coast gasoline prices by only a few cents per gallon, while possibly raising costs slightly in Gulf Coast markets. The broader driver of energy prices remains the global supply shock tied to the Iran conflict.

The administration is simultaneously pursuing several other measures to stabilize markets, including:

• A coordinated 400-million-barrel emergency oil release by members of the International Energy Agency

• A U.S. drawdown of 172 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over roughly four months

• Temporary sanctions waivers allowing additional Russian oil to reach global markets

Even with those steps, analysts warn the measures may serve only as a short-term bridge if disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz persist.

Why the U.S. still needs imported oil. Although the United States is now a net exporter of crude oil, domestic refineries — particularly on the East and West coasts — are configured to process heavier crude grades than the light crude produced by many U.S. shale fields. As a result, the country still imports certain types of oil to meet refinery demand.

That structural mismatch means global supply disruptions — such as those triggered by the Iran war — can quickly feed into U.S. fuel markets even when domestic production remains strong.

Policy and market implicationsEnergy marketsA Jones Act waiver could allow foreign tankers to move crude or refined fuels from the Gulf Coast to the East Coast, easing regional shortages if Middle East imports decline.The impact on gasoline prices would likely be modest, as global crude supply disruptions remain the dominant price driver.Agricultural logisticsThe waiver could also affect domestic shipping of fertilizer, feed, and grain, particularly shipments along the Gulf Coast and Atlantic seaboard.USDA officials are already focused on fertilizer supply disruptions tied to the war and sanctions on major producers.Shipping and maritime industryMaritime unions and U.S. shipbuilders typically strongly oppose Jones Act waivers, arguing they undermine domestic shipping capacity and national security.Waivers have historically been used only during major disasters or energy emergencies, such as after hurricanes.Political outlookAny waiver would likely be temporary and narrowly targeted, given the law’s strong bipartisan backing in Congress.Lawmakers from maritime states and organized labor groups are expected to push back if a waiver extends beyond emergency fuel shipments.Why it matters for agricultureThe potential Jones Act waiver could have several important ripple effects for U.S. agriculture, particularly at a time when the Iran war is already pushing energy and fertilizer markets higher.Fertilizer supplyFertilizer imports moving through Gulf and East Coast ports could reach U.S. distribution hubs faster if foreign vessels are allowed to handle domestic shipping routes.This is especially relevant as the Trump administration and USDA are already monitoring fertilizer supply disruptions tied to geopolitical tensions and sanctions on major producers.Diesel prices for farmersDiesel is one of the largest operating costs for U.S. farmers, powering tractors, irrigation systems, and grain transportation.If a waiver slightly improves fuel distribution to the East Coast and inland markets, it could help moderate diesel spikes during planting and harvest seasons — though the overall impact would likely remain limited because crude prices are set globally.Grain transportation and export flowsDomestic shipping flexibility could help move grain, feed ingredients, and ethanol more efficiently between U.S. ports, particularly along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts.That could become more important if shipping disruptions tied to the Iran conflict continue to affect global freight routes and insurance costs.Livestock and feed marketsHigher fuel and shipping costs increase the price of feed ingredients and livestock transportation, which can compress margins for cattle, hog, and poultry producers.Any easing of domestic shipping bottlenecks could help stabilize feed logistics, particularly for coastal feed mills.Farm input costsEnergy prices influence nearly every farm input — including fertilizer production, chemical manufacturing, and drying grain.Even small improvements in fuel distribution can help soften cost pressures if global oil prices remain volatile.Bottom Line: A Jones Act waiver would not solve the energy shock created by the Iran war, but it could reduce logistical bottlenecks and marginally ease fuel and input costs for U.S. agriculture during a period of heightened supply chain stress.

WEATHER

— NWS outlook: A major winter storm is forecast to bring very heavy snow across the upper Great Lakes and upper Midwest along with widespread high winds across the northern tier states… …Severe thunderstorms appear likely across the mid-section of the country to the east-central U.S. later Sunday into Monday morning… …Snow and gusty winds will progress through interior New England today… …High elevation snow continues today across the northern Rockies as the tail end of an Atmospheric River event tapers off along the Cascades… …An anomalously early heatwave will begin to intensify over the western U.S. heading into the new week… …Critical Risk of fire weather for the Central and Southern High Plains…