Birthright Citizenship Reaches the Supreme Court
Hosted by Michael Barbaro
Featuring Adam Liptak
Produced by Mooj ZadieAlex SternWill ReidEric KrupkeMichael Simon Johnson and Alexandra Leigh Young
Edited by Liz O. Baylen and Devon Taylor
Engineered by Chris Wood
Original music by Marion Lozano and Pat McCusker
On Thursday, the Trump administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship ended up in front of the Supreme Court.
Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court for The New York Times, discusses the White House's unusual legal strategy for defending its plan, and what it might mean for the future of presidential power.
Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
Adam Liptak, covers the Supreme Court. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law for 14 years before joining The Times in 2002.
Mr. Liptak wrote about the unusual features of the birthright citizenship case.
He also wrote about the Supreme Court justices across the ideological spectrum who have been critical of nationwide injunctions, which apply to everyone affected by a challenged law, regulation or executive action.
Charlie Savage and Alan Feuer shared four takeaways from the birthright citizenship case.
There are a lot of ways to listen to 'The Daily.' Here's how.
We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode's publication. You can find them at the top of the page.
The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Michael Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez, Brendan Klinkenberg, Chris Haxel, Maria Byrne, Anna Foley and Caitlin O'Keefe.
Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam, Nick Pitman and Kathleen O'Brien.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
43 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Walmart responds to major boycott from customers
Walmart (WMT) , which has recently been fighting to keep prices low in its stores amid looming tariffs, has another significant threat on its plate. The retail giant is facing a major boycott threat from customers after far-right group Libs of Chicago tweeted a photo of a full-page ad that ran in the New York Times in March promoting the No Kings movement. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter The movement aims to show an act of "defiance" against President Donald Trump's decision to host a massive military parade in Washington, D.C., on his birthday, which is on Flag Day, June 14. Related: Walmart suffers another major boycott from customers No Kings organizers claim on their website that the parade is a "made-for-TV display of dominance," and have planned over 1,500 anti-Trump protests nationwide to show that "real power isn't staged in Washington. It rises up everywhere else." "We're the people of the United States of America," reads the No Kings ad in the Times. "The honor, dignity, and integrity of our country are not for sale. Our government is of the people, by the people, for the people." The bottom of the ad states that it was paid for by Christy Walton, the billionaire widow of John Walton, one of the sons of Walmart founder Sam Walton. Christy inherited a portion of her husband's Walmart shares after he died in 2005. "If there was ever a time to boycott Walmart, it's now," said Libs of Chicago in the tweet, which has amassed thousands of views. Image source: Bloomberg/Getty Images In response to the boycott call, a Walmart spokesperson told Forbes in a statement that the company is not associated with Christy in any way. "The advertisements from Christy Walton are in no way connected to or endorsed by Walmart," said the spokesperson. "She does not serve on the board or play any role in decision-making at Walmart." Related: Walmart CEO has a harsh warning for customers The Walmart spokesperson also responded to the recent protests in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration policy, claiming the retailer does not endorse violence. "We condemn violence, including when it's directed towards law enforcement, and the damaging of property," said the spokesperson. "As a company with associates and customers in the Los Angeles region, we remain focused on their safety and that of impacted communities." This is not the first time this year that Walmart has faced a big boycott from customers. In April and May, a group called The People's Union organized two massive weeklong boycotts of the retail giant, accusing the company of contributing to economic corruption. "We've been watching prices rise while wages stay the same," said The People's Union USA founder John Schwarz in an Instagram post in April. "We've watched these companies rake in billions while families can barely afford groceries, and Walmart, just like the rest of them, has been a part of that problem. So this is where we, once again, draw the line." More Retail: Costco quietly plans to offer a convenient service for customersT-Mobile pulls the plug on generous offer, angering customersKellogg sounds alarm on unexpected shift in customer behavior The People's Union USA has been organizing "economic blackouts" of large corporations since February. So far, it has also recently organized specific boycotts of Amazon, Target, General Mills, and soon, McDonald's. During the first quarter of the year, Walmart's comparable sales increased by 4.5% year-over-year. However, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon warned during an earnings call last month that the company is starting to notice customers pulling back their spending in several categories. Walmart's foot traffic also declined during the quarter. According to recent data from the retailer's foot traffic in stores declined by 2.4% year-over-year. In February, Walmart visits dropped by 5.9% year-over-year, and in March, visits fell by 4%. However, visits spiked by 4.5% in April, aligning with the Easter holiday. Related: Target CEO admits a major mistake amid boycotts from customers The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Supreme Court rules for girl with epilepsy in opinion that could affect education access lawsuits
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court sided with a teenage girl with a rare form of epilepsy on Thursday in a unanimous ruling that could make it easier for families like hers to go to court over access to education. The girl's family says that her Minnesota school district didn't do enough to make sure she has the accommodations she needs to learn, including failing to provide adequate instruction in the evening when her seizures are less frequent. But lower courts ruled against the family's discrimination claims in court, despite finding the school had fallen short. That's because courts in that part of the country require plaintiffs in lawsuits against schools to show officials used 'bad faith or gross misjudgment,' a higher legal standard than most disability discrimination claims. The family appealed to the Supreme Court. The district, Osseo Area Schools, said that lowering the legal standard could expose the country's understaffed public schools to more lawsuits if their efforts fall short, even if officials are working in good faith. The district also argued that all claims over accommodations for people with disabilities should be held to the same higher standard — a potentially major switch that would have been a 'five-alarm fire' for the disability rights community, the girl's lawyers said. ___ Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Supreme Court revives lawsuit over mistaken FBI raid
The Supreme Court on Thursday revived an Atlanta family's lawsuit over a botched FBI raid on their home in 2017 but put off deciding its ultimate fate. In a unanimous decision, the justices instead sent the case back to a lower court to take another crack at deciding whether the lawsuit can move forward. Federal agents smashed through Trina Martin's front door in 2017 while executing a search warrant at the wrong address, believing it was the home of an alleged violent gang member. Martin and her boyfriend at the time were startled out of bed with a flash-bang grenade and guns raised, as her 7-year-old son screamed from another room. She sued the government in 2019, accusing the agents of assault and battery, false arrest and other violations, under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), which waives the government's sovereign immunity and lets people injured by certain actions of federal officers bring some claims for damages against it under state law. But a federal judge in Atlanta dismissed the suit and the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision. The justices now say the lower courts erred. 'Where does all that leave the case before us?' Justice Neil Gorsuch asked in the court's opinion. 'We can say this much: The plaintiffs' intentional-tort claims survive their encounter with subsection (h) thanks to the law enforcement proviso, as the Eleventh Circuit recognized. But it remains for that court on remand to consider whether subsection (a)'s discretionary-function exception bars either the plaintiffs' negligent or intentional-tort claims,' he wrote. Patrick Jaicomo, Martin's lawyer, argued before the justices that 'innocent victims' of the government's mistakes must have an available legal remedy. The FTCA was amended in 1974 after a pair of wrong-house raids made headlines, which he suggested makes clear that Martin's lawsuit should be allowed to proceed. Exceptions to the law make it more complicated. Frederick Liu, who argued for the government, said that an exception to the FTCA preventing plaintiffs from suing the government for damages that arise out of an officer's discretionary acts applies to the case. He also suggested that entering the wrong home was a 'reasonable mistake' and an example of the 'policy trade-offs' officers make when placed in risky situations. In the court's opinion, Gorsuch acknowledged that lower courts have taken different views on the discretionary-function exception and that 'important questions' must be weighed regarding under which circumstances they apply. 'But those questions lie well beyond the two we granted certiorari to address,' Gorsuch wrote. 'And before addressing them, we would benefit from the Eleventh Circuit's careful reexamination of this case in the first instance. 'It is work enough for the day to answer the questions we took this case to resolve, clear away the two faulty assumptions on which that court has relied in the past and redirect it to the proper inquiry,' he said. DEVELOPING
