News
The Major Supreme Court Cases of 2024
No Supreme Court term in recent memory has featured so many cases with the potential to transform American society.
The consequential cases, with decisions arriving by late June or early July, include three affecting former President Donald J. Trump, two on abortion, two on guns, three on the First Amendment rights of social media companies and three on the administrative state.
In recent years, some of the court’s biggest decisions have been out of step with public opinion. Researchers at Harvard, Stanford and the University of Texas conducted a survey in March to help explore whether that gap persists.
Trump’s Ballot Eligibility
Conservative bloc
Roberts
Kavanaugh
Barrett
Gorsuch
Alito
Thomas
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
A decision that Mr. Trump was ineligible to hold office would have been a political earthquake altering the course of American history.
Where does the public stand?
| Think Trump is eligible to run in 2024 | Think Trump is not eligible |
Immunity for Former Presidents
Is there a major precedent involved?
But in 1982, in Nixon v. Fitzgerald, a closely divided court ruled that Nixon, by then out of office, was absolutely immune from civil lawsuits “for acts within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.”
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The court’s decision will determine whether and when Mr. Trump will face trial for his attempts to overturn his 2020 loss at the polls.
Where does the public stand?
| Think former presidents are not immune from criminal prosecution for actions they took while president | Think former presidents are immune |
Obstruction Charges for Jan. 6 Assault
Is there a major precedent involved?
In a series of decisions, the court has narrowed the reach of federal criminal laws aimed at public corruption and white-collar crime.
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The case has the potential to knock out half of the federal charges against former President Donald J. Trump for plotting to subvert the 2020 election and could complicate hundreds of Jan. 6 prosecutions.
Where does the public stand?
| Think the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, were criminal | Think the events were not criminal |
Abortion Pills
Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The case will determine whether access to the drug, which is used in the majority of abortions in the United States, will be sharply curtailed.
Where does the public stand?
| Think the F.D.A.’s approval of mifepristone should not be revoked | Think the approval should be revoked |
Emergency Abortion Care
The Supreme Court will decide whether a federal law that requires emergency rooms to provide stabilizing care to all patients overrides a state law, in Idaho, that imposes a near-total ban on abortion.
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
It is the first time the Supreme Court is considering a state law criminalizing abortion since it overturned Roe v. Wade. The decision may affect more than a dozen states that have passed near-total bans on abortion.
Where does the public stand?
| Think Idaho hospitals must provide abortions in medical emergencies | Think they are not allowed |
Second Amendment Rights of Domestic Abusers
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
Lower courts have struck down federal laws prohibiting people who have been convicted of felonies or who use drugs from owning guns.
The court may start to clear up the confusion it created in the Bruen decision, in the first major test of its expansion of gun rights. The standard it announced has left lower courts in turmoil as they struggle to hunt down references to obscure or since-forgotten regulations.
Where does the public stand?
| Think barring domestic abusers from possessing firearms does not violate their Second Amendment rights | Think it violates their rights |
Restrictions on the Homeless
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson
The Supreme Court will decide whether ordinances in Oregon aimed at preventing homeless people from sleeping and camping outside violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The case could have major ramifications on how far cities across the country can go to clear homeless people from streets and other public spaces.
Where does the public stand?
| Think banning homeless people from camping outside even when local shelters are full violates the Constitution | Think it does not violate the Constitution |
Social Media Platforms’ First Amendment Rights
Moody v. NetChoice; NetChoice v. Paxton
The laws’ supporters argue that the measures are needed to combat perceived censorship of conservative views on issues like the coronavirus pandemic and claims of election fraud. Critics of the laws say the First Amendment prevents the government from telling private companies whether and how to disseminate speech.
Is there a major precedent involved?
In 1980, in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, the court said a state constitutional provision that required private shopping centers to allow expressive activities on their property did not violate the centers’ First Amendment rights.
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The cases arrive garbed in politics, as they concern laws aimed at protecting conservative speech. But the larger question the cases present transcends ideology. It is whether tech platforms have free speech rights to make editorial judgments.
Where does the public stand?
| Think states cannot prevent social media companies from censoring speech | Think states should be able to prevent censoring |
Disinformation on Social Media
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The Supreme Court is also considering a case that raises similar issues, National Rifle Association v. Vullo, about whether a state official in New York violated the First Amendment by encouraging companies to stop doing business with the National Rifle Association.
The case is a major test of the role of the First Amendment in the internet era, requiring the court to consider when government efforts to limit the spread of misinformation amount to censorship of constitutionally protected speech.
Where does the public stand?
| Think federal officials urging private companies to block or remove users violates the First Amendment | Think it does not violate the First Amendment |
N.R.A. and the First Amendment
National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo
The Supreme Court will decide whether a New York State official violated the First Amendment by trying to persuade companies not to do business with the National Rifle Association after the school shooting in Parkland, Fla.
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The case is one of two that will determine when government advocacy edges into violating free speech rights. The other, Murthy v. Missouri, concerns the Biden administration’s dealings with social media companies.
The case centers on when persuasion by government officials crosses into coercion.
Where does the public stand?
| Think the state regulator’s behavior violates the N.R.A.’s First Amendment rights | Think it does not violate the N.R.A.’s rights |
Opioids Settlement
Harrington v. Purdue Pharma
Is there a major precedent involved?
The case is the first time the Supreme Court will address whether a bankruptcy plan can be structured to give civil legal immunity to a third party, without the consent of all potential claimholders. The legal maneuver under scrutiny has become increasingly popular in bankruptcy settlements.
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
Approving the deal would funnel money toward states and others who have waited for years for some kind of settlement. Yet the Sacklers would be largely absolved from future opioid-related claims. More broadly, the case may have implications for similar agreements insulating a third party from liability.
Where does the public stand?
| Think the Sackler family should not keep immunity from future lawsuits | Think family should keep immunity |
Racial Gerrymandering
Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the N.A.A.C.P.
Is there a major precedent involved?
Yes. A series of Supreme Court decisions say that making race the predominant factor in drawing voting districts violates the Constitution.
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The Alabama case was governed by the Voting Rights Act, the landmark civil rights statute, and the one from South Carolina by the Constitution’s equal protection clause.
The case concerns a constitutional puzzle: how to distinguish the roles of race and partisanship in drawing voting maps when Black voters overwhelmingly favor Democrats. The difference matters because the Supreme Court has said that only racial gerrymandering may be challenged in federal court under the Constitution.
Where does the public stand?
| Think these changes to the districts are unconstitutional | Think they are constitutional |
Power of Federal Agencies
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo; Relentless v. Department of Commerce
Is there a major precedent involved?
Yes. Chevron is one of the most cited cases in American law.
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
“The question is less whether this court should overrule Chevron,” Paul D. Clement, one of the lawyers for the challengers, told the justices, “and more whether it should let lower courts and citizens in on the news.”
Overturning the decision could threaten regulations on the environment, health care, consumer safety, nuclear energy, government benefit programs and guns. It would also shift power from agencies to Congress and to judges.
Where does the public stand?
| Courts should defer to administrative agencies when laws are unclear | Courts should not defer to agencies |
Agency Funding
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America
Is there a major precedent involved?
There is no precedent squarely on point.
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
A ruling against the bureau, created as part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act after the financial crisis, could cast doubt on every regulation and enforcement action it took in the dozen years of its existence. That includes agency rules — and punishments against companies that flout them — involving mortgages, credit cards, consumer loans and banking.
Where does the public stand?
| Think this agency funding structure is unconstitutional | Think it is constitutional |
Administrative Courts
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
A ruling against the S.E.C. would not only require it to file cases in federal court but could also imperil administrative tribunals at many other agencies, including the Federal Trade Commission, the Internal Revenue Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Social Security Administration and the National Labor Relations Board.
Where does the public stand?
| Think federal agencies bringing actions in administrative proceedings rather than in federal courts is not constitutional | Think it is constitutional |
Cross-State Air Pollution
Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
Prevailing winds carry emissions of nitrogen oxide toward Eastern states with fewer industrial sites. The pollutant causes smog and is linked to asthma, lung disease and premature death.
Bump Stocks for Guns
Is there a major precedent involved?
Are there recent rulings on the subject?
The case involves how to interpret a federal law that banned machine guns, the National Firearms Act of 1934. The definition was broadened by the Gun Control Act of 1968 to include parts that can be used to convert a weapon into a machine gun. At issue is whether bump stocks fall within those definitions. Federal appeals courts have split on the issue.
A decision could do away with one of the few efforts at gun control that gained political traction after the Las Vegas massacre in 2017. More broadly, a ruling could help clarify the scope of the power of federal agencies.
It’s a tiny restaurant in the Little Morocco neighborhood of Queens. But throughout this World Cup, it has swelled with pride, song and beating drums as the Moroccan national team has pushed its way deep into soccer’s biggest international tournament.
It’s a scene that has been echoed across the United States — in a multitude of languages and colors, as soccer fans from all over the world, many now making their homes in America, have packed bars, restaurants, living rooms and concert venues.
No matter where they came from or where they gathered, they all sought the same experience: a chance to watch their nations compete while surrounded by others who share passion and pride for the country they or their ancestors once called home.
Together, these fans have brought places throughout the United States to life.
Bosnia vs Qatar
Bosnians Rejoice in St. Louis, Mo.
Thousands of Bosnians settled in the St. Louis area during the 1990s, as war and genocide ripped their communities apart. The city is now home to more than 60,000 Bosnians, scores of whom gathered at Bevo Caffe Lounge on June 24 to watch Bosnia and Herzegovina play.
This is only the second time the team has qualified for the World Cup — and the first time it has reached the knockout round. Its reward: Meeting one of the hosts, the United States, on Wednesday in Santa Clara, Calif.
Haiti vs Brazil
In Miami, Little Haiti Comes to Life
More than 100,000 residents of Miami-Dade County, Fla., are of Haitian descent, and the Little Haiti neighborhood of Miami has long been their central hub.
During the World Cup, fans of Haiti’s team have flocked to the neighborhood, packing restaurants, bars and even parking lots to watch the action. Many have come wearing jerseys, while others simply dressed in the red and blue of the Haitian flag.
Haiti ended up in a tough group, losing all of its matches, including a 3-0 defeat to Brazil on June 19. But for some fans, the fact that the team had qualified at all was its one victory. Before this year, Haiti had played in only one other World Cup, in 1974.
Morocco
Moroccan Joy in Queens, N.Y.
Touria Lamtahaf worked as a chef four years ago at a restaurant in Astoria, Queens, in the heart of an enclave on Steinway Avenue known as Little Morocco.
After the Moroccan team upset Portugal in a World Cup quarterfinal, Ms. Lamtahaf remembers hundreds of Morocco fans surging onto Steinway Avenue, setting off flares and red smoke bombs to celebrate.
“It was a good memory for all of us,” she said. “We were very proud. You just needed something to be happy. After Covid, this was amazing.”
The neighborhood has long been a hub for immigrant communities from North African countries, including Egypt, and is also home to a large Greek community.
Many settled in Astoria decades ago, drawn by low rents and a neighborhood that could feel calm compared with other bustling parts of New York. Ms. Lamtahaf, who moved to the United States in 2007, said that she originally lived in Ridgewood neighborhood of Queens, but word of mouth led her to Astoria, where she now runs her own restaurant.
The restaurant, Dar Lbahja, is just a few blocks from where she used to work. Ms. Lamtahaf said that when she opened it just over a year ago, she wanted to create a space where people could not just eat, but also gather to watch soccer, like she did growing up with her father in Morocco.
“It was only one TV, and we had to watch with him,” Ms. Lamtahaf said. “So we grew up with the soccer.”
During this tournament, Morocco fans have packed into Dar Lbahja on game days, with many in Morocco’s red jersey, and others in the team’s white kit. They were rewarded with a berth in the knockout stages, and then again on Monday when their team won a tense matchup with the Netherlands in a penalty shootout.
Fans took to the streets in jubilant celebration, just as they did in 2022.
Kacem Ettahali, 19, of Houston, is spending the summer in New York for an internship and watched the first Morocco game of the tournament on June 13 at the restaurant.
After the team scored, Mr. Ettahali received a flurry of texts from his friends. “When they think of Morocco, they think of me,” he said.
He wasn’t the only Texan in the joint. Jori and Ahmed Lamghari traveled from the Dallas area because Ms. Lamghari, 43, wanted her husband to experience the city during the tournament. “I wanted him to get the New York World Cup vibe,” she said.
Mr. Lamghari, 33, said that “Moroccans make their own ambience,” adding, “We want to live it.”
France vs Norway
In Chicago, Hope for Another French Title
The French love a good outdoor drinking venue. For the country’s June 26 match against the rowing Norwegians, fans gathered on the outdoor patio of Soccer House in Chicago, a city whose deep French roots stretch back to the colonial days.
France is widely considered a tournament favorite, potentially giving its fans several more opportunities to celebrate.
Argentina vs Austria
In Provo, Utah, Messi Mania Is a Family Affair
Sporting the colors is intergenerational in Provo, Utah. Luis and Lidia Peve moved there 25 years ago, following a son who emigrated first, and decorated their home with small Argentina flags ahead of the team’s match against Austria on June 22.
As game time approached, about a dozen members of the family painted their faces with the sky blue and white of Argentina’s flag. Together, they sat around the TV with their eyes trained particularly on Lionel Messi, the team’s star, who is likely playing in his last World Cup.
He finished the game with three goals — a hat trick — and a new generation of fans in the Peve household.
D.R. Congo vs Colombia
In Silver Spring, Md., a Happy Return to the World Cup
Congolese fans in Silver Spring, Md., belted out their national anthem in a veterans hall, hands over their hearts, ahead of the country’s match against Colombia on June 23.
Refugee aid programs have resettled many Congolese families in the suburbs north of the nation’s capital, as their nation has been rived by war, unrest and now an Ebola outbreak.
The Congolese side lost its match to Colombia on that day. But the team managed to advance out of the group stage for the first time in its history. Before this World Cup, the country had been to the tournament only once, in 1974, when it lost all of its matches.
Portugal
A Block Party of Red and Green in Rhode Island
The go-to drink special last weekend in East Providence, R.I., was a vodka cocktail called the CR7. And you’d be hard-pressed to find a resident of the region who didn’t know it was in honor of Cristiano Ronaldo, the 41-year-old Portuguese striker who is playing in his sixth — and likely last — World Cup, wearing his famous No. 7.
The drink was served at the Portuguese restaurant O Dinis, a neighborhood staple. A large number of Portuguese immigrants settled in this corner of Rhode Island and nearby Massachusetts during the Industrial Revolution, finding work in the textile, whaling and manufacturing industries.
“Life is beautiful in Portugal,” said Natalia Paiva-Neves, who moved to the United States when she was 16 and now runs O Dinis, which was founded by her father. “But at the time, there was a lot of poverty, because there were no jobs, and there was no tourism. There was none of that stuff going on, so you had to find a means to provide for your family.”
After pre-gaming over CR7s, along with beer, wine, meats and shrimp, some fans walked from O Dinis to a watch party that stretched for two blocks, from a screen in the parking lot of nearby Cafe Alma to Campino’s, another Portuguese restaurant.
“It’s just a great feeling,” said Kevin Matos, the cafe’s owner. “Everybody’s enjoying themselves. It doesn’t matter the result on the screen.”
Some fans might not have agreed, though a scoreless draw sent both teams through to the knockout stage.
The block party, with hundreds of fans lining the streets, was in part the brainchild of East Providence’s mayor, Roberto DaSilva. “We had no idea that it’d be this many people showing up,” he said. “We thought we got a good crowd, but this is much more than than I ever expected.”
Some had to stand on their tiptoes see the screens. Others packed into shops to sit down and watch the game, while others pulled out their phones as they stood in line to buy beer and snacks from food trucks and vendors.
Mexico vs South Korea
A Backyard Party in a Texas Border Town
Roughly four out of five residents in the Texas border town of Weslaco are of Mexican descent, making the country’s June 18 match in Guadalajara feel like a home game.
For a youth soccer team, it was a chance to watch their heroes take another step toward the knockout rounds.
Under the night sky, they watched anxiously, breaking into dance after Mexico won.
Uruguay vs Spain
Elimination Brings Anguish to Uruguay Fans in Miami
Uruguay needed this one. The nation that hosted the first World Cup in 1930, winning the tournament that year and again in 1950, was on the brink of elimination last week against Spain — considered one of the strongest teams in the tournament.
Fans at Doña Paulina, a Uruguayan restaurant in Miami, anxiously watched their team fight for a chance to stay in the competition.
It wasn’t to be. Spain emerged victorious, 1-0.
Japan vs Tunisia
In San Diego, Fans Cheer the Samurai Blue
Their team is called the Samurai Blue, and the many Japanese fans living in Southern California — a diaspora that first settled there in the late 19th century as farmers and fishermen, and endured harsh incarceration during World War II — made their blue kits prominent as the team played its way through a so-called group of death.
They eventually earned a second-place finish to reach the round of 32. The result was a Monday matchup with Brazil, in which Japan fell 2-1.
Iran
In Los Angeles, Mixed Feelings About the Iranian Team
For Americans from Iran, supporting the Iranian national team has been a thorny issue.
Some have refused to even watch the matches. To them, the team feels like an extension of the government, whose persecution drove many to flee the country. It’s especially difficult as their new home, the United States, and their old home are at war.
“That’s a little conflict for me,” said Roozbeh Farahanipour, who helped lead an Iranian student uprising in 1999 and fled the country the following year, seeking political asylum in America. “I am a little different from other fans, because no way I can cheer or stand for either Islamic Republic of Iran’s national anthem, nor for the flags.”
He added, “I am American now. My flag is the U.S. flag.”
Others of Iranian descent have eagerly backed the national team and bristled at its travails, especially in Southern California, which was host to the team’s first match and is home to the largest diaspora of Iranians outside Iran. Many live, shop and eat in the Westwood area of Los Angeles, where an enclave has become known as Tehrangeles, after the Iranian capital.
Still, compared with those of other diasporas, gatherings to back the Iranian team have seemed smaller and more muted. Only a handful of fans gathered at Attari Sandwich Shop, a Persian eatery in the heart of Tehrangeles, during Iran’s June 21 match against Belgium at SoFi Stadium in nearby Inglewood, Calif.
Inside the restaurant, some fans anxiously watched the game over kebab plates and pastries. Others outside proudly waved their flags on the neighborhood thoroughfare, Westwood Boulevard.
Bijan Bahmani, who lives in Los Angeles, took his 2-year-old son to Iran’s match against New Zealand on June 15 in Inglewood with his father-in-law. While he opposes the Iranian regime and hopes for democracy one day, Mr. Bahmani said he still wanted to cheer to the national team.
“It’s complicated, because we have feelings a lot of different ways, with the complicated politics,” said Mr. Bahmani, 41, who moved to the United States in 2001. “I am definitely rooting for Iran because they represent Iran, not the government.”
Even as he took in the game with this family, Mr. Bahmani said the war was on his mind.
“I hope this peace lasts,” he said, referring to the current fragile cease-fire. “Every day, we’re worried.”
Cape Verde vs Saudi Arabia
Celebrating the Small but Mighty in New Bedford, Mass.
Every tournament has a surprise underdog. This year, it’s Cape Verde, a small island nation off the western coast of Africa. Its team had an opportunity on Friday to become the smallest country by population ever to advance to a World Cup knockout round.
The pivotal match drew people of Cape Verdean descent to a veterans hall in New Bedford, Mass., about an hour drive south of Boston. Like Portugal and Brazil, whaling and related industries brought a sizable population of immigrants from Cape Verde to southeastern New England.
A scoreless tie with Saudi Arabia was all it took for tears and roars to erupt in the veterans hall. Their team would keep playing, for at least one more game.
Brazil vs Haiti
A Brazilian Dance Party Near Boston
Massachusetts has a long history of Portuguese-speaking settlers, making Brazilians feel welcome in the Boston area. That’s especially the case in the southwest suburb of Framingham, Mass., where the Brazilian-born population rivals that of Boston.
They packed into Tropical Cafe, a Brazilian restaurant in Framingham, gathering around hightop tables as their team played Haiti on June 19. After Brazil secured a 3-0 win, fans made the restaurant an impromptu dance club to celebrate.
Germany vs Curaçao
In Texas, German Fans Root, and Eat, to Honor a Neighbor
Bratwurst and steins of beer accompanied the match at Bavarian Grill in Plano, Texas, a Dallas suburb, as Germany played Curaçao in Houston on June 14. But perhaps the city’s most important fan of the German team was not there.
Jürgen Mahneke, who was born in Braunschweig, Germany, immigrated to the United States in 1984, and worked in hotels across the country before settling in Plano.
He opened the restaurant in 1993, and died at age 67 on June 10, a day before the World Cup began.
His restaurant went on with the planned festivities. One of the managers said Mr. Mahneke would have wanted them to. His team won its opener, 7-1, but went home on Monday, falling to Paraguay in a heartbreaking penalty shootout — the opposite of Morocco’s elating win hours later.
The U.S. Supreme Court
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images
The Supreme Court Tuesday upheld the long-established right of children born on U.S. soil to automatic American citizenship, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. In so doing, the court rejected President Trump’s most aggressive attempt to limit immigration in the United States.
Writing for the court majority, Chief Justice John Roberts traced birthright citizenship back to the founding of the nation. Just as the colonists demanded “the rights of Englishmen” more than 250 years ago, he said, Congress, after the Civil War, amended the Constitution to specify automatic citizenship for any child born on U.S. soil.
“Citizenship then and now was the right to have rights”—and the framers of the 14th amendment extended that promise to every free born person in this land. He concluded: “We keep that promise today.”
The vote was 6-to-3, depending on how you count it. Altogether, five justices signed on to the Roberts’ majority opinion. A sixth, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, agreed only that federal legislation enacted in the 1950s grants automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the lead dissent, a 91-page opus that agreed with Trump’s assertion that the 14th amendment only applied to former slaves and their descendants. The Thomas dissent added ominously that he “was not sure that “today’s opinion will stand the test of time.” The dissent was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, with Justice Samuel Alito writing a separate dissent.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who, like Thomas is African American, responded to some of the themes in the Thomas dissent.
“Despite his longstanding endorsement of a colorblind society,” she wrote, “Justice Thomas now surprisingly suggests that the citizenship clause was a race-conscious remedial measure relating only to freed slaves.”
Cecillia Wang, legal director of the ACLU, who successfully argued the case at the Supreme Court, said President’s Trump failed attempt to limit birthright citizenship was transparent.
“A majority of the court saw through what the president was trying to do in spinning birthright citizenship as something that can flex and retract and expand depending on what the administration in power thinks about immigration policy,” she said.
Wang sees birthright citizenship as “much more fundamental than that.”
“It is part of how our country rejected caste distinctions and championed freedom and equality,” she said.
Yale law professor Akhil Amar called the court’s opinion a classic example of the court sticking to the original meaning of the Constitution. The text of the 14th Amendment, he said, “is about the child. It doesn’t say anything about parents.”
University of Virginia law professor Amanda Frost, however, was surprised and saddened that the court was so closely divided.
“The very length of the opinion,” she told NPR, plus “the fact that you had four justices say the Constitution does not require near universal birthright citizenship, which had been the understanding, that suggests that this is a fringe argument that the Trump administration has succeeded in moving into the mainstream, even though it has not succeeded in the end of the result.”
The issues in the birthright case focused in large part on the longstanding, and as of Tuesday, still standing, meaning of the 14th Amendment, which was enacted after the Civil War. It guarantees birthright citizenship to almost all persons born or naturalized in the United States. Chief Justice Roberts pointedly said the only exceptions written into the amendment were for certain Indian tribes, which were not subject to the laws of the United States at the time, and the children of foreign diplomats. That understanding was so well accepted that even in World War II, when Japanese citizens were confined to internment camps, their children, born in those camps, were automatically deemed to be American Citizens.
The Supreme Court’s decision Tuesday was the second time the justices have upheld birthright citizenship. The court’s previous decision came in 1898 in the case of Wong Kim Ark, born in the U.S. to Chinese parents. His great grandson, Norman Wong, issued a statement today saying, “My great grandfather, Wong Kim Ark, never set out to become a symbol. He was one man, only a cook, and yet he stood up for what was right, and I believe that it has made a difference. As a result, he stood up for the rights of all of us Americans – it just so happens that I am related to him. Today’s ruling shows that his victory remains as important now as it was in 1898.”
The high court also issued opinions in two other cases on Tuesday. In a 6-to-3, ideologically divided vote, the court upheld state laws that prevent transgender athletes from playing on women’s sports teams. Writing for the conservative majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that the laws violate neither federal statutes nor the 14th Amendment. States, he said, have a legitimate interest in protecting the safety of sports, which he suggested could be compromised if transgender girls or women are allowed to play on female teams. Similarly, he said transgender athletes could also compromise fairness in athletic competition.
Sitting in the court chambers Tuesday when Kavanaugh summarized his opinion were not only his wife and mother, but his two daughters, whose athletic teams their father has long coached.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by her liberal colleagues, issued a partial dissent. She agreed with the majority that the benefits of sports are “immense,” but she wrote that these laws unconstitutionally deny transgender athletes the opportunity to play with their peers.
In a third ideologically divided case Tuesday, the Court struck down decades-long limits on the amount of money political parties can spend on candidates. The limits were challenged by the Republican National Committee. The decision may well increase by millions of dollars the amount of money that will pour into campaigns.
Rep. Thomas Kean Jr., R-N.J., arrives at the U.S. Capitol with his wife Rhonda Kean on June 30.
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
New Jersey Republican Thomas Kean Jr. said it was struggles with depression that kept him away from Congress for nearly four months with no explanation to his constituents.
Kean last voted on March 5th, missing numerous votes and other appearances on Capitol Hill since. In April, House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters he had spoken to Kean and that he was dealing with an undisclosed medical issue. Kean was not spotted until recently at his New Jersey home.
Speaking from the House floor on Tuesday, the second term lawmaker said he had checked into a hospital for testing several months ago after health concerns, and was subsequently diagnosed with depression.
“Talking about myself has never come naturally,” Kean said. “But I believe that I owe an explanation to the people of New Jersey’s seventh district, to my colleagues in this chamber and to the American people for my absence.”
Kean said he originally did not think his diagnosis would result in a long-term absence. Doctors recommended he remain in the hospital to address the illness, and it was his fastest route to recovery, he said.
“It is physical. It is emotional,” he said. “And until you experience it yourself, it is difficult to fully understand how powerful this illness could be.”
Kean said he miscalculated how long he would be away, estimating it would be a matter of weeks. However, he said like the roughly 48 million Americans who have battled the illness, he learned there is no timeline for recovery.
“I am grateful that I accepted help,” Kean said. “Today I stand before you healthier, stronger and excited to return to the work that I love.”
Kean’s absence proved a struggle for House Republicans, who contend with a razor thin majority to pass party priorities. For weeks, Kean and his office declined to share additional details on why he was away, feeding rumors and speculation and raising interest in a member known for his privacy.
Despite his absence, Kean won the GOP primary earlier this month to defend his seat in Congress in this fall’s midterm elections. He will face Democrat Rebecca Bennett, a former U.S. Navy helicopter pilot and healthcare executive.
Bennett has targeted Kean’s absence in her campaign. Democrats have said Kean’s 7th congressional district is a top target to flip in their pursuit of taking back the majority.
“Tom Kean Junior, wherever you are, you have failed this district,” Bennett told supporters at an event last week.
In a statement after Kean’s remarks on Tuesday, Bennett said she was relieved he was well and wished him good health.
“But let’s be clear: I got into this race because Tom Kean Jr. was failing our community long before this absence,” she said.
Kean is not the first member of Congress in recent years to speak publicly about their struggles with depression. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., took leave from the Capitol in 2023 after he was diagnosed with the illness. In Fetterman’s case, his office announced the news within days of his starting treatment.
Kean was elected to Congress for his first term beginning in 2023, flipping a district that was represented by former Democratic Congressman Tom Malinowski.
He comes from a long line of politicians: His father, former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean Sr., was appointed by former President George W. Bush as a chair of the 9/11 Commission. Kean’s grandfather and great grandfather also served in Congress.
-
Maryland2 minutes agoWes Moore’s military record: what’s known, what isn’t
-
Michigan9 minutes agoWhitmer says she will pull Michigan National Guard from D.C. if troops used in Trump’s Safe and Beautiful Mission
-
Massachusetts12 minutes agoMassachusetts dad on ‘adventure of a lifetime’ left fighting for his life in Fiji after noticing bug bite
-
Minnesota17 minutes agoInvasive ‘bloody red shrimp’ reach Lake Superior
-
Mississippi24 minutes agoMississippi Lottery Mississippi Match 5, Cash 3 results for June 30, 2026
-
Missouri27 minutes agoMissouri Sports Betting May 2026: $256.4M Handle, Record $21.3M Revenue
-
Montana32 minutes ago
Montana Lottery Mega Millions, Big Sky Bonus results for June 30, 2026
-
Nebraska39 minutes agoErstad joins Nebraska golf program
