As the U.S. Supreme Court approaches its summer recess, the justices are expected to issue many critical rulings on immigration, presidential power, and other hot-button issues.
Here’s a look at some of those cases:
Trump v. Barbara
The court heard oral arguments on April 1, probing whether President Donald Trump had violated the Constitution and federal law with his executive order restricting birthright citizenship.The case, Trump v. Barbara, focuses on the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause that says, “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.”
Trump has said that the country’s current birthright citizenship policy was created to grant citizenship to freed slaves and their children, not to children born to temporary visitors.
Multiple federal courts disagreed, pointing to the Supreme Court’s 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. In that landmark decision, the Supreme Court said the 14th Amendment granted citizenship to a Chinese man whose parents were permanently domiciled in the United States.
Overall, the justices seemed skeptical of the administration’s arguments.
Girls’ Sports
Another aspect of the 14th Amendment, known as the equal protection clause, came before the court when it considered West Virginia’s and Idaho’s laws banning male participation in female sports.
Two federal appeals courts ruled against the state laws, finding they violated the equal protection clause by discriminating on sex and so-called transgender status.
One of those courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, said that West Virginia’s law also violated Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded educational institutions.
The states argued that their laws classifying sports teams by sex did not constitute unlawful discrimination.
Oral argument in the cases, known as West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, occurred in January. Overall, the justices seemed inclined to vote in favor of the states.
Temporary Protected Status
On April 29, the court heard the Trump administration’s request to end temporary protected status (TPS) for Haitians and Syrians after lower courts blocked the move.TPS is a designation that allows individuals from countries affected by armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary events to remain in the United States.
President Barack Obama’s administration granted TPS for Haitians and Syrians in the United States in 2010 and 2012, but former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem revoked the status for them last year.
Multiple federal judges blocked Noem’s actions, saying that her decisions didn’t follow the proper procedures. One judge in Washington also said that her TPS revocation for Haitians was based on racial animus and violated the Constitution.
One of the Justice Department’s primary arguments is that the judges exceeded their authority in questioning Noem’s decisions.
They pointed to language in federal law that said “there is no judicial review of any determination ... with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation” of temporary protected status.
Trump’s Firings
The Supreme Court is expected to issue two major decisions affecting the president’s ability to fire high-ranking officials.At the beginning of his second term, Trump fired large numbers of federal staff as well as the heads of so-called independent commissions, such as the Federal Trade Commission.
Several federal judges have blocked Trump’s terminations based on Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a 1935 Supreme Court decision that said Congress could limit reasons for which a president could remove various federal officials.
Trump appealed one of those rulings and argued that the 1935 decision was a bad precedent.
Instead, he said, the president had greater authority under Article II of the Constitution.
The case, Trump v. Slaughter, focused on his attempt to fire former FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, and was heard by the court in December. During oral argument, the justices seemed more sympathetic to Trump’s position.
The following month, the justices heard Trump v. Cook, which focused on his attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook over allegations that she had committed mortgage fraud before joining the Fed.
Trump said the alleged fraud should disqualify her from having control over monetary policy. Cook argued the Federal Reserve Act limited her removal to “for cause” reasons and that the president couldn’t fire her for acts that took place before she assumed office.
The resulting decision could have an impact on Trump’s firing authority and how courts view the independence of the Federal Reserve.
Check out the full report for more upcoming cases and analysis.
—Matthew Vadum; Sam Dorman; Stacy Robinson; Jackson Richman
BOOKMARKS
The Justice Department is charging about 450 defendants for various healthcare fraud schemes totaling more than $6.5 billion. In one case, a man is accused of billing insurers $89 million for medically unnecessary cardiovascular tests involving college athletes.
President Donald Trump’s administration can fast-track deportations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled on Tuesday. The ruling struck down a 2025 decision that said the expansion of expedited deportations violated the constitutional rights of illegal immigrants and would lead to the erroneous removal of some immigrants.
New York and the federal government filed dueling lawsuits this week over new state laws that bar law enforcement officers from concealing their identities using face coverings, and end local cooperation with federal immigration agents. Check out Chase Smith’s report for the details.
The Food and Drug Administration has labeled an ongoing recall of Gas-X as the most serious and urgent risk level due to contamination of the product. “There is a potential that ingestion of the Softgels contaminated with the diluted propylene glycol-based coolant may result in adverse events such as nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and diarrhea,” a news release about the recall issued earlier this month said.
The United Nations’ International Maritime Organization will evacuate more than 11,000 sailors who were stranded in the Middle East this year due to the war between the United States and Iran. “This large-scale operation will be carried out in close cooperation with Iran, Oman, all other coastal states in the region, the United States, and the maritime industry,” the group’s secretary-general, Arsenio Dominguez, said in a statement.
—Stacy Robinson
