Trump, Lisa Cook and Supreme Court
Digest more
(Corrects to remove misplaced comma in paragraph 3) By Andrew Chung Aug 7 (Reuters) - When the U.S. Supreme Court in June ruled in favor of broad citizenship rights for babies born in the United States,
The president moved this week to counter legal defeats on ending birthright citizenship and firing a Fed governor, while seeking the justices’ help with his ballroom.
President Trump is once again attempting to put restrictions on who is automatically guaranteed citizenship after being born in the U.S., just weeks after the Supreme Court struck down his attempt to end birthright citizenship.
President Donald Trump said he was signing two executive actions on immigration, including one limiting the number of people eligible for U.S. citizenship after being born in the United States. The second order focused on stopping people from coming to the U.S. to give birth. Read more.
A federal appeals court found that whether “a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help.”
President Donald Trump is charting a new course on one of his key obsessions after being humiliated by the Supreme Court. Controlling birthright citizenship has been one of Trump’s biggest priorities as part of the MAGA crackdown on immigration.
"Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide," the appeals panel's majority said.
A federal appeals court said the White House lacks the authority to unilaterally construct the 90,000-square-foot ballroom. President Trump said the administration will appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Trump administration has officially refunded about $100 billion in illegally obtained tariff revenue—and there’s still much more to be paid back. The administration’s action is the result of the Supreme Court’s February ruling that the “reciprocal” tariffs Trump announced on “liberation day” under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act were unconstitutional.
The president’s emergency appeal on his mail ballot order is poised to test a 20-year-old Supreme Court principle that was intended to avoid chaos before elections.