Mark Joseph Stern

The next Democratic president should declare that the National Emergencies Act and Article II of the Constitution allow him to: •admit D.C. and Puerto Rico as states •abolish ICE •grant citizenship to any immigrant •disband the 5th Circuit •expand the Supreme Court Seriously: Why the hell not?

BREAKING: By an apparent 6–3 vote, the Supreme Court halts an injunction that had prevented immigration agents from racially profiling Latinos in central California. Sotomayor, dissenting, says the decision is "unconscionably irreconcilable with our nation's constitutional guarantees."

BREAKING: The Supreme Court allows the Trump administration to move forward with the abolition of the Department of Education. It gives no explanation for its order. All three liberals dissent. www.documentcloud.org/documents/25... From Sotomayor's dissent:

The Supreme Court takes up just one new case today, Johnson v. Congress, involving veterans' benefits. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court... FYI: I don't expect the court to issue more opinions until, at the earliest, April 17, when the justices are next scheduled to convene!

By a 4–3 vote, the North Carolina Supreme Court's Republicans toss out a long-running lawsuit seeking to enforce the state constitution's guarantee of a quality public education for all children. The one reasonable Republican dissents, as do the two Democrats. www.documentcloud.org/documents/27...

Really good piece about something quite bad that shouldn't get lost in this week's crazy news cycle

The vast majority of Americans are birthright citizens. Unless you naturalized or were born abroad to an American parent, you are a citizen because of the 14th Amendment. There is nothing constitutionally distinct about Americans born here to non-Americans. We are all literally equal citizens.

I think the lawsuit against Trump's White House "ballroom" will ultimately fail because a higher court will hold that the plaintiffs don't have standing to challenge the construction simply because they're upset and offended by its illegality. Not saying that's good—just the likely outcome. BUT ...

I stand by my earlier prediction: 7–2, with Kavanaugh possibly concurring on narrower statutory grounds that would let Congress restrict birthright citizenship in the future. Should be 9–0! slate.com/news-and-pol...

Agree. Although Roberts' first question about "domicile" to the ACLU lawyer, Cecillia Wang, was really a softball that lets her rebut the government's "domicile" theory about Wong Kim Ark. He doesn't actually sound undecided.

Endorse

I think the Supreme Court is going to rule against Trump's attack on birthright citizenship 7-2.

Both Roberts and Gorsuch sound intensely skeptical of the Trump administration's arguments against birthright citizenship. The three liberals have already opposed Trump's executive order. So if this holds, there's five votes against Trump right there.