The Supreme Court will hear a challenge to President Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship, focusing on injunctions against his executive order. This order, based on a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment, seeks to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen mothers. Several lower courts swiftly issued nationwide injunctions against the order, which the administration unsuccessfully attempted to overturn. The Court must decisively reject the administration’s arguments to uphold birthright citizenship and maintain the integrity of the judicial system.
Read More
The Supreme Court’s decision to consider former President Trump’s attempt to ban birthright citizenship via executive order is deeply troubling. The very notion that such a fundamental right, enshrined in the Fourteenth Amendment, could be overturned through an executive action, rather than the constitutionally mandated process of amendment, is alarming. This isn’t just a legal battle; it’s a direct challenge to the bedrock principles of American citizenship.
The sheer audacity of attempting to circumvent the Constitution through an executive order is astounding. The established legal framework for altering constitutional rights is clear and deliberate, yet this attempt seeks to bypass it entirely.… Continue reading
A North Carolina federal court issued a preliminary order directing election officials to comply with a state court ruling that could disenfranchise thousands of military and overseas voters in a contested state Supreme Court election. However, the federal court also blocked election certification pending a ruling on the state court remedy’s constitutionality. This action risks undermining election legitimacy, mirroring concerns raised in *Bush v. Gore* regarding the premature announcement of questionable vote recounts. Legal experts argue the state court’s actions violate the 14th Amendment’s due process clause by retroactively changing eligibility rules and potentially disenfranchising voters who complied with existing law. The optimal course is to resolve the constitutional questions before attempting to collect further voter information.
Read More
The Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn nationwide injunctions blocking its attempt to end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. Lower courts have consistently rejected the administration’s argument, deeming the executive order unconstitutional and contrary to established legal precedent interpreting the 14th Amendment. The administration’s appeal focuses on limiting the scope of the injunctions, not directly challenging the constitutionality of the policy itself, though it presented arguments questioning the long-held interpretation of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court will likely issue a briefing schedule soon, requiring a rapid response from those opposing the administration’s efforts.
Read More
Luigi Mangione’s lawyer is seeking to suppress evidence—including a 3D-printed gun, fake ID, and a notebook expressing hostility toward wealthy executives—obtained during his arrest in Pennsylvania. The motion argues that Altoona police illegally searched Mangione’s backpack and person without a warrant after deeming him “suspicious.” This evidence is crucial in both the Pennsylvania firearm and forgery charges, and the New York murder case stemming from the death of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. A similar motion to suppress evidence will be filed in the New York case, where Mangione faces life imprisonment without parole if convicted.
Read More
A US appeals court refused the Trump administration’s request to immediately halt a lower court’s block on an executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship for some immigrant children. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will conduct a full review of the case in June. The administration argued the order was crucial to immigration reform, while opposing states contended it violated the 14th Amendment. The appeals court majority found the administration failed to demonstrate an urgent need for immediate action.
Read More
Following a string of legal setbacks, President Trump, echoing a Napoleon Bonaparte quote from the film *Waterloo*, asserted on social media that a president saving the country violates no law. This statement, endorsed by the White House, comes amidst widespread court challenges to his administration’s actions, including efforts to curtail federal funding and redefine the 14th Amendment. Allies, including Elon Musk, have attacked judges ruling against them, raising serious concerns among constitutional scholars about a potential constitutional crisis. The White House dismisses these concerns, instead blaming the judiciary.
Read More
A New Hampshire federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Trump’s executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented or temporarily residing immigrants. The order, targeting a clause within the 14th Amendment, would have denied citizenship documents to these newborns starting February 19th. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs, including community support organizations, would likely suffer irreparable harm if the order proceeded, citing established legal precedent affirming birthright citizenship, such as the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case. This injunction follows similar rulings in Washington and Maryland, and the legal battle over the constitutionality of the executive order continues.
Read More
During a flight to the Super Bowl, Donald Trump claimed that DOGE analysts discovered irregularities in U.S. Treasuries, suggesting the country might not be obligated to repay some debts. This statement directly contradicts the 14th Amendment, which explicitly prohibits questioning the validity of the public debt. While markets haven’t reacted significantly, the assertion is alarming given its potential to destabilize the financial system and its reliance on purported analyses from individuals with questionable expertise. The gravity of the situation remains uncertain pending further developments.
Read More
Following arguments from 18 state attorneys general and several cities, a federal judge in Boston is considering a request to block President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship. Plaintiffs contend the order violates the 14th Amendment and would cost states significant funding for essential services. The judge’s decision is pending, but two other federal judges have already issued nationwide injunctions against the order. The core legal dispute centers on the 14th Amendment’s definition of citizenship and the executive branch’s authority to alter it.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood