INTERNACIONAL
Supreme Court to debate Trump restrictions on birthright citizenship and enforcement of nationwide injunctions
The case on the Supreme Court’s docket this week ostensibly deals with a challenge to the Trump administration’s efforts to narrow the definition of birthright citizenship.
But overriding that important constitutional debate is a more immediate and potentially far-reaching test of judicial power: the ability of individual federal judges to issue universal or nationwide injunctions, preventing temporary enforcement of President Donald Trump’s sweeping executive actions.
That will be the focus when the nine justices hear oral arguments Thursday morning about how President Trump’s restrictions on who can be called an American citizen can proceed in the lower federal courts.
Trump signed the executive order on his first day back in office that would end automatic citizenship for children of people in the U.S. illegally.
SUPREME COURT POISED TO MAKE MAJOR DECISION THAT COULD SET LIMITS ON THE POWER OF DISTRICT JUDGES
In addressing the Trump administration’s birthright citizenship case, the Supreme Court will also be posed a much broader question concerning the injunction power of federal judges. (Getty Images)
Separate coalitions of about two dozen states, along with immigrant rights groups, and private individuals — including several pregnant women in Maryland — have sued.
Three separate federal judges subsequently issued orders temporarily blocking enforcement across the country while the issues are fully litigated in court. Appeals courts have declined to disturb those rulings.
Now the three consolidated cases come to the high court in an unusual scenario, a rare May oral argument that has been fast-tracked for an expected ruling in coming days or weeks.
The executive order remains on hold nationwide until the justices decide.
But the cases will likely not be decided on the merits at this stage, only on whether to narrow the scope of those injunctions. That would allow the policy to take effect in limited parts of the country or only to those plaintiffs actually suing over the president’s authority.
SUPREME COURT TO HEAR ORAL ARGUMENTS IN BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP CASE
A high court decision could be sweeping, setting a precedent that would affect the more than 310 — and counting — federal lawsuits against White House actions filed since Jan. 20, according to a Fox News data analysis.
Of those, more than 200 judicial orders have halted large parts of the president’s agenda from being enacted, almost 40 of them nationwide injunctions. Dozens of other cases have seen no legal action so far on gateway issues like temporary enforcement.
While the Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the use of universal injunctions, several conservative justices have expressed concerns over power.
Justice Clarence Thomas in 2018 labeled them «legally and historically dubious,» adding, «These injunctions are beginning to take a toll on the federal court system – preventing legal questions from percolating through the federal courts, encouraging forum shopping, and making every case a national emergency for the courts and for the Executive Branch.»
Justice Clarence Thomas has called universal injunctions «legally and historically dubious.» (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Emergency docket and politics of the moment
And it comes to the Supreme Court as part of the so-called emergency or «shadow» docket, time-sensitive appeals known officially as «applications» that usually arrive in the early stages.
They seek to temporarily block or delay a lower court or government action that, despite its procedurally narrow posture, can have immediate and far-reaching implications.
Things like requests for stays of execution, voting restrictions, COVID vaccine mandates or access to a federally approved abortion medication and, since January, Trump’s sweeping executive reform plans.
Some members of the court have expressed concern that these kinds of appeals are arriving with greater frequency in recent years, high-profile issues leading to rushed decisions without the benefit of full briefing or deliberation.
‘ACTIVIST’ JUDGES KEEP TRYING TO CURB TRUMP’S AGENDA – HERE’S HOW HE COULD PUSH BACK
Justice Elena Kagan last year said the shadow docket’s caseload has been «relentless,» adding, «We’ve gotten into a pattern where we’re doing too many of them.»
The pace this term has only increased with the new administration frustrated at dozens of lower court setbacks.
«We’ve seen a lot of justices critical of the fact that the court is taking an increasing number of cases and deciding them using the shadow docket,» said Thomas Dupree, a former top Justice Department lawyer and a top appellate advocate.
«These justices say, ‘Look, we don’t have to decide this on an emergency basis. We can wait.’»
The Supreme Court’s «shadow» docket caseload is «relentless,» according to Justice Elena Kagan. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Many progressive lawyers complain the Trump administration has been too eager to bypass the normal district and intermediate appellate court process, seeking quick, end-around Supreme Court review on consequential questions of law only when it loses.
The debate over birthright citizenship and injunctions is expected to expose further ideological divides on the court’s 6-3 conservative majority.
That is especially true when it comes to the 13 challenges over Trump policies that have reached the justices so far, with six of them awaiting a ruling.
The court’s three more liberal justices have pushed back at several preliminary victories for the administration, including its ban on transgender individuals serving in the military and the use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport scores of illegal immigrants suspected of criminal gang activity in the U.S.
TRUMP’S REMARKS COULD COME BACK TO BITE HIM IN ABREGO GARCIA DEPORTATION BATTLE
Dissenting in one such emergency appeal over the deportations to El Salvador, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, «The Government’s conduct in this litigation poses an extraordinary threat to the rule of law.»
«Our job is to stand up for people who can’t do it themselves. And our job is to be the champion of lost causes,» Sotomayor separately told an American Bar Association audience last week. «But, right now, we can’t lose the battles we are facing. And we need trained and passionate and committed lawyers to fight this fight.»
Justice Sonia Sotomayor (Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Trump has made no secret of his disdain for judges who have ruled against his policies or at least blocked them from being immediately implemented.
He called for the formal removal of one federal judge after an adverse decision over deporting illegal immigrants. That prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare public statement, saying, «Impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.»
And in separate remarks last week, the chief justice underscored the judiciary’s duty to «check the excesses of Congress or the executive.»
The arguments
The first section of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, «All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.»
Trump said last month he was «so happy» the Supreme Court will hear arguments, adding, «I think the case has been so misunderstood.»
The president said the 14th Amendment, granting automatic citizenship to people born in the U.S., was ratified right after the Civil War, which he interpreted as «all about slavery.»
«If you look at it that way, we would win that case,» the president said in Oval Office remarks.
President Donald Trump has cited the 14th Amendment as being «all about» slaves freed around the time of its ratification and believes a birthright citizenship case viewed from that angle can be won. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Executive Order 14160, «Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,» would deny it to those born after Feb. 19 whose parents are illegal immigrants. And it bans federal agencies from issuing or accepting documents recognizing citizenship for those children.
An estimated 4.4 million American-born children under 18 are living with an unauthorized immigrant parent, according to the Pew Research Center. There are approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the country, 3.3% of the population. Although some census experts suggest those numbers may be higher.
But in its legal brief filed with the high court, the Justice Department argues the issue now is really about judges blocking enforcement of the president’s policies while the cases weave their way through the courts, a process that could last months or even years. The government initially framed its high court appeal as a «modest request.»
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS ADDRESSES DIVISIONS BETWEEN JUSTICES AFTER SEVERAL RECENT SCOTUS SKIRMISHES
«These injunctions exceed the district courts’ authority under Article III [of the Constitution] and gravely encroach on the President’s executive power under Article II,» said Solicitor General John Sauer, who will argue the administration’s case Thursday. «Until this Court decides whether nationwide injunctions are permissible, a carefully selected subset of district courts will persist in granting them as a matter of course, relying on malleable eye-of-the-beholder criteria.»
The plaintiffs counter the government is misguided in what it calls «citizenship stripping» and the use of nationwide injunctions.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
«Being directed to follow the law as it has been universally understood for over 125 years is not an emergency warranting the extraordinary remedy of a stay,» said Nicholas Brown, the attorney general of Washington state. «If this Court steps in when the applicant [government] is so plainly wrong on the law, there will be no end to stay applications and claims of emergency, undermining the proper role and stature of this Court. This Court should deny the applications.»
The consolidated cases are Trump v. CASA (24a884); Trump v. State of Washington (24a885); Trump v. New Jersey (24a886).
Supreme Court,Federal Judges,Donald Trump,Immigration,Immigrant Rights,Naturalization,Constitution
INTERNACIONAL
Crisis política en Francia: Emmanuel Macron nombrará un nuevo primer ministro en las próximas 48 horas y no disolverá la Asamblea Nacional
Un premier sin ambiciones presidenciales
Proyecto de presupuesto el lunes
La líder de extrema derecha francesa y miembro del parlamento, Marine Le Pen. Foto ReutersEl debate de la reforma de jubilaciones
¿Y ahora?
Un gobierno de corta duración
Olivier Faure, primer secretario del Partido Socialista Francés, llega a una reunión con el primer ministro saliente francés, Sébastien Lecornu. Foto ReutersLe pen censurará todo hasta la disolución
Los verdes no quieren a Cazeneuve
¿Un premier de izquierda?
Anti-Hamas militias in Gaza endorse Trump peace plan
Exclusive video from the Center for Peace Communications shows anti-Hamas militia leaders in Gaza expressing support for Donald Trump’s proposed peace plan to end the conflict. (Video: The Center for Peace Communications.)
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
JERUSALEM — As negotiations continue in Egypt on the U.S. roadmap for peace, Fox News Digital obtained video from the U.S.-based Center for Peace Communications (CPC), revealing that anti-Hamas militias have endorsed President Donald Trump’s peace plan to end the war in Gaza and secure the release of Israeli hostages.
This comes amid reports of heavy fighting last week between an anti-Hamas clan and terrorists from the jihadi Hamas movement in a neighborhood in Khan Younis in the Gaza Strip that could mark a sea change in local governance in the war-ravaged area.
Yaser Abu Shabab, who leads an anti-Hamas militia in Gaza, said «We see in President Trump’s plan a path to halt the bloodshed and bring peace to the Middle East.» (The Center for Peace Communications)
The full-throttle support from the anti-Hamas militias for Trump’s plan could potentially mean more trouble for the terrorist movement that has ruled Gaza with an iron fist for the last 17 years.
Three of the anti-Hamas militias publicly endorsed Trump’s peace plan for Gaza, according to the CPC video. Yasser Abu Shabab, the head of the Popular Forces militia in Rafah, said, «We see in President Trump’s plan a path to halt the bloodshed and bring peace to the Middle East.»
WHO IS THE GAZAN CHALLENGING HAMAS RULE, AND DOES HE HAVE A CHANCE?
Palestinians demonstrate in the Shuja’iyya neighborhood in eastern Gaza City against Hamas rule and call for an end to the war. Gaza City, Mar 26, 2025. (TPS-IL)
Ashraf Al-Mansi, leader of the Popular Northern Forces, said, «We, in the People’s Army, Northern Forces in the Gaza Strip, extend our sincere thanks and appreciation to U.S. President Donald Trump.»
Rami Hillis, the leader of the Popular Defense Forces, said his organization and the honorable clans in the Gaza Strip «will exert our utmost efforts and our capabilities to ensure the success of this proposal.» Two years ago, on Oct. 7, the Hamas terrorist movement invaded Israel and slaughtered roughly 1,200 people, including more than 40 American citizens.
Hamas terrorists emerge in a show of strength escorting Red Cross vehicles carrying 3 Israeli hostages to be released as part of the cease-fire deal. (TPS-IL)
«This marks the first time that anti-Hamas militias have proven on the ground their ability to challenge Hamas in open combat and to expel them from their areas. We have seen minor clashes before, but this seems to mark a major escalation,» said Michael Nahum from CPC.
The CPC, along with an American news organization, the Free Press, posted footage on X about the deadly clashes on Friday that reportedly resulted in the killing of 20 Hamas terrorists, including a commander.
AS TRUMP’S GAZA DEAL NEARS, FAMILY WARNS ISRAEL NOT TO FREE ANOTHER SINWAR
According to the CPC, the infamous Hamas «Sahm Unit,» which is «known for brutally suppressing Gazan dissident voices, went to Khan Younis» with the goal of arresting local Palestinians and «transferring them to a hospital for interrogation and possible execution.»
On the same day as the clashes, Israel Defense Forces disclosed that Hamas had built sophisticated terrorist tunnels on the compounds of two hospitals — the Jordanian Field Hospital and Hamad Hospital — in the Gaza Strip. The tunnel adjacent to the Jordanian hospital contained a workshop for the production of missiles. The use of hospitals and medical facilities as weapons areas by Hamas is considered a war crime under the Geneva Convention.
Yaser Abu Shabab seen with members of his militia. Shabab is standing, second to the right. (Center for Peace Communications)
Hamas claims it entered Khan Younis to detain Palestinians who are collaborating with Israel. The al-Mujaida clan in southern Gaza resisted the Hamas assault of roughly 50 Hamas terrorists aboard five pickup trucks armed to the teeth, including with a rocket-propelled grenade launcher. Hamas reportedly murdered five members of the large al-Mujaida family.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The anti-Hamas militias have reportedly received support from Israel. Nahum said they are growing, and there are now four and probably as many as 10 militias across the Gaza Strip. «For the first time in a generation, we really might be looking at the end of Hamas rule in Gaza,» said Nahum.
There are an estimated 20,000 Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip, according to some assessments.
israel,conflicts,terrorism,donald trump,middle east
INTERNACIONAL
“Una voz que incomode de verdad”: quién debería ganar el Nobel de Literatura según la Inteligencia Artificial
En Estocolmo todavía no amanece y ya se respira la conspiración. Cada octubre, un puñado de académicos suecos decide —en silencio y detrás de puertas acolchadas— quién representará la conciencia literaria del mundo. Afuera, el planeta especula. En los cafés de París, en los portales de Seúl, en los grupos de WhatsApp de traductores latinoamericanos, se cruzan las mismas apuestas: ¿será por fin Murakami?, ¿se atreverán con Krasznahorkai?, ¿darán el salto hacia África o América Latina?
El Nobel de Literatura no elige solo un escritor: elige un relato del mundo. Y ese relato, cada año, dice algo sobre el clima político, sobre la sensibilidad estética del tiempo y sobre quiénes —todavía— tienen derecho a decir la verdad.
Este año consultamos con ChatGPT -esa IA que viene escribiendo tanto- sobre las posibilidades de triunfo de los distintos candidatos. Le pedimos que analizara los premiados anteriores y el contexto político y literario actual. A continuación, su respuesta
El premio mayor y por qué
En 2023 fue Jon Fosse, con su lenguaje mínimo y espiritual, quien representó la búsqueda de lo esencial. En 2024, Han Kang llevó el premio a Corea del Sur con una literatura que mira de frente el trauma y el cuerpo. La Academia parece moverse entre lo introspectivo y lo histórico, entre el susurro poético y la denuncia.
Ahora, en 2025, la pregunta vuelve a encenderse: ¿será el año de una voz que incomode de verdad?
Porque el nombre que resuena con más fuerza —y que podría darle al premio su giro más arriesgado en años— es el de Can Xue (残雪), la escritora china que ha hecho del delirio, la opacidad y la belleza fragmentada una forma de rebelión.
La concesión del Nobel de Literatura combina méritos estéticos y resonancia ética. En el contexto actual, la obra de Can Xue ofrece tres aportes decisivos: 1) un desafío a la lógica del realismo narrativo, 2) una exploración del trauma sin moralismos ni melodrama, y 3) una apertura del canon literario más allá de los centros tradicionales. Su nombre figura entre los favoritos de las principales casas de apuestas y en las quinielas críticas de medios europeos y asiáticos.
Frente a nombres previsibles como László Krasznahorkai o Haruki Murakami, Can Xue encarna algo distinto: la posibilidad de que el Nobel premie no solo lo universal, sino lo indómito. Su literatura, hecha de símbolos, sueños y desplazamientos, emerge de un contexto donde la censura y el control cultural son parte del aire cotidiano. Premiarla no sería un gesto diplomático, sino un acto de afirmación estética: reconocer que la disidencia también puede escribirse desde lo irracional y lo poético.
El Nobel, conviene recordarlo, es siempre un espejo político. Después de su crisis institucional de 2018, la Academia ha intentado redibujar su autoridad, diversificando lenguas y geografías. Un premio a Can Xue colocaría en el centro a una autora que no milita, no se exilia, no traduce su experiencia a la gramática occidental del sufrimiento, sino que inventa su propio lenguaje para habitar la incomodidad.
Su escritura desarma al lector. No explica: sugiere. No cuenta: evoca. En un tiempo saturado de narrativas previsibles y de autoficciones terapéuticas, Can Xue representa otra forma de riesgo: el de la oscuridad. La de no ofrecer sentido inmediato, sino forzarlo a nacer.
Por eso su eventual Nobel no sería un premio más. Sería una toma de posición. Frente al confort del mercado y la previsibilidad del gusto, la elección de Can Xue recordaría que la literatura no está para calmar, sino para inquietar.
La Academia anunciará su decisión este jueves 9 de octubre de 2025, según informó NobelPrize.org. Hasta entonces, el rumor seguirá ardiendo: entre quienes esperan justicia geográfica y quienes desean un salto estético real.
Si el Nobel busca una voz que refleje el desorden del siglo XXI —una literatura que no consuele, sino que desestabilice—, Can Xue es la respuesta. Porque hay veces en que el mundo no necesita claridad. Necesita una grieta.
Diputados | La oposición busca limitar el uso de los DNU y el oficialismo advierte que la ofensiva es “desestabilizante”
La desgarradora autopsia del atroz femicidio de Daiana Mendieta: «La mataron de un…»
Histórico: banco líder en Argentina patea el tablero y lanzará su propio dólar cripto
El gobernador de Río Negro se despegó de Fred Machado y vinculó a un diputado kirchnerista con una organización criminal
Preoupación en Boca: Edinson Cavani podría perderse el duelo ante Barracas Central
Crisis política en Francia: Emmanuel Macron nombrará un nuevo primer ministro en las próximas 48 horas y no disolverá la Asamblea Nacional
Mica Viciconte confesó por qué no fue a conocer a su primer sobrino: “Me cuesta, no me hallo”
Atacada por ser judía: el aterrador relato de una mujer en Buenos Aires
Tras la renuncia de Espert a su candidatura, el PJ busca capitalizar la crisis libertaria y fortalecerse en las urnas
En la antesala de la elección de la CGT, los gremios del transporte refuerzan su conducción y su perfil opositor a Milei
CHIMENTOS2 días agoMica Viciconte confesó por qué no fue a conocer a su primer sobrino: “Me cuesta, no me hallo”
- POLITICA3 días ago
Tras la renuncia de Espert a su candidatura, el PJ busca capitalizar la crisis libertaria y fortalecerse en las urnas
- POLITICA2 días ago
En la antesala de la elección de la CGT, los gremios del transporte refuerzan su conducción y su perfil opositor a Milei
