Supreme Court Lets Trump Get Closer to Ending Birthright Citizenship

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear arguments over the legality of Donald Trump’s plan to end birthright citizenship, the 1868 constitutional detail that entitles any person born on U.S. soil to an American passport.

In doing so, the nation’s highest judiciary has set the stage for a decision, expected by the end of June, that could undermine the Fourteenth Amendment. That amendment guarantees citizenship to everyone born or naturalized on U.S. soil.

Trump attempted to end the constitutionally enshrined right mere hours after he was sworn into office in January by signing an executive order stating that children born to immigrants on temporary visas or who are in the country illegally should not be entitled to birthright status. That order was blocked by multiple judges in multiple court circuits over the last year.

In the case the Supreme Court has agreed to hear, which stems from qualms in New Hampshire, the Trump administration argues that language included in the amendment—specifically, “subject to the jurisdiction of”—requires applicable children to not only be present in the country at the time of the birth but also to confer their allegiance to the United States. Exactly how newborn babies would be expected to do so, however, is not clear.

“Long after the Clause’s adoption, the mistaken view that birth on U.S. territory confers citizenship on anyone subject to the regulatory reach of U.S. law became pervasive, with destructive consequences,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in legal arguments on behalf of the administration.

Sauer added that the intent of Trump’s executive order is to “restore the Clause’s original meaning.”

It’s not the first time this year that the Supreme Court has heard arguments on the topic.

In May, justices on both ideological sides of the court flamed the Trump administration’s efforts to rewrite birthright citizenship through America’s courts, questioning why the government’s attorneys would even bring the case to the judiciary’s doorstep when “every court has ruled against” the administration on birthright citizenship.

At the time, Justice Brett Kavanaugh pressed Sauer into a corner, forcing the solicitor general to admit that the Trump administration doesn’t even know how it would enforce its birthright citizenship order. Sauer managed to appall another Trump appointee—Justice Amy Coney Barrett—by arguing that Trump has the “right” to disregard legal opinions that he doesn’t personally agree with.

Donald Trump’s attempt to nab more Republican congressional seats and keep his party in control of Congress just got a boost Friday when Indiana’s House of Representatives passed a new legislative map.

The new map, which seeks to give Republicans control of all of the state’s nine congressional seats, passed the state House by a 57–41 vote. The new map will make it harder for the state’s only two Democrats, Representative André Carson and Frank Mrvan, to be reelected. But the map now faces hurdles in the state Senate, despite its being under Republican control, as Republican senators have warned there isn’t enough support.

The fight has turned nasty, with Trump threatening to support primary challengers to these senators, among other attacks on his Truth Social account. As a result, Indiana Republicans have faced violent threats, with at least 11 elected Indiana Republicans being targeted with threats like “swatting,” false police reports meant to cause a violent law enforcement response. One of them, state Senator Greg Goode, hadn’t even made any public comments about redistricting.

The Indiana state Senate won’t meet until January, creating a time crunch to have new maps approved in time for the 2026 midterm elections. If they were to actually pass early in the legislative session, they would likely face legal challenges that could prevent their implementation in time for primary elections.

While the Supreme Court approved Texas’s gerrymandered maps Thursday, there’s no telling if it would do the same for other Republican states, not to mention the fact that other challenges to Texas’s new maps on racial grounds are still possible. Democratic-led states like California and Virginia are also making their own efforts to combat a blatant Republican attempt to subvert the will of the people.

We’re about to get more Epstein documents.

Trump-appointed Judge Rodney Smith of the U.S. District Court of Southern Florida on Friday ordered the release of previously secret grand jury transcripts from 2005 and 2007 investigations into sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The move was spurred by the passing of Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna’s Epstein Files Transparency Act.

This comes after weeks of resistance from President Trump that culminated in him switching course and caving to demands to release the files.

“The United States seeks to unseal the grand jury materials in this case and publicly release them, as well as lift any preexisting protective orders that would prevent the Department of Justice from releasing the materials,” Smith’s order reads. “The Act applies to unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials that relate to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.”

Other judges from Florida and New York have noted that the grand jury transcripts are unlikely to reveal any new information. The order doesn’t set a deadline for the release of the documents, which will be redacted before being released to the public.

This story has been updated.

The Department of Homeland Security has innovated a cringey new way to spread its blatantly made-up statistics documenting its ethnic cleansing campaign: introducing DHS Wrapped!

In the latest installment of the Trump administration’s weird attempts to appeal to Gen Z, the official DHS X account shared a graphic Thursday channeling Spotify’s Wrapped year-end recaps of its users’ listening habits—but instead of Sabrina Carpenter songs, the DHS version listed the stupidly named immigration operations and some statistics that didn’t quite add up.

“A year full of high stakes operations, deportations, and historic firsts. Here’s what America witnessed in 2025,” the post read.

According to the graphic, the Trump administration had deported more than 586,000 immigrants, while another 1.9 million had self-deported—but those two numbers don’t really make sense.

For the government to have deported 586,000 people, they would have needed to remove about 13,022 people every week since Donald Trump entered office roughly 45 weeks ago. DHS is reportedly removing fewer than 7,500 people every week. That’s still a terrifying number, but nowhere near the level of removals they are claiming.

It’s also unclear how many people have self-deported, and the DHS has given conflicting accounts.

Last month, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed that 1.6 million people had self-deported. In just a few weeks, that number has ballooned by 300,000. So, in the past month roughly the population of Jersey City just packed their bags and left?

Meanwhile, only 35,000 people have used CBP Home to leave the country, costing roughly $7,500 per self-deportation, The Atlantic reported last week. (The agency previously told The New Republic that “tens of thousands” of undocumented immigrants had used the CBP Home app to relocate to their home countries.)

The Trump administration is invoking racist tropes in a policy document, claiming that Europe is facing “civilizational erasure.” 

The White House’s new National Security Strategy, posted Thursday night, called the European Union antidemocratic and seemed to make an openly bigoted jab at the demographics of European NATO states, saying, “Over the long term, it is more than plausible that within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European.” 

“As such, it is an open question whether they will view their place in the world, or their alliance with the United States, in the same way as those who signed the NATO charter,” the document states. 

The paper went on to say the U.S. should “help Europe correct its current trajectory,” including by supporting “patriotic” parties. “We want Europe to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation,” the document reads.

The administration also accused governments of “the subversion of democratic processes” to thwart public opinion to end the war in Ukraine. The document praises Europe’s far-right political parties, saying that “the growing influence of patriotic European parties” gives “cause for great optimism.” 

While sitting European leaders haven’t commented, former leaders have reacted with alarm, comparing the document to rhetoric from Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian government. 

“It’s language that one otherwise only finds coming out of some bizarre minds of the Kremlin,” said Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden, on X. He pointed out the only part of the world where the document saw a threat to democracy was Europe. Bildt also described the document as “to the right of the extreme right in Europe” and “JD Vance on steroids.” 

An anonymous European diplomat also mentioned the vice president, saying the document’s “tone was not promising. Even worse than Vance’s speech in February,” referring to Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference where he extolled nativism and far-right politics while downplaying the threat from Russia. 

Latvia’s former Prime Minister Krisjanis Karins told Reuters that “the happiest country reading this is Russia,” adding that “Moscow has been trying to break the transatlantic bond for years, and now it seems the greatest disruptor of this bond is the U.S. itself, which is unfortunate.”

Much of the document seems to echo the racist rhetoric coming from other parts of the Trump administration, whether it’s the dog whistles coming out of the Department of Homeland Security or the underpinnings of the administration’s immigration policies. It appears that the White House is more concerned about racial and cultural homogeneity than the real external threats.