Category: Reshape Federal Courts

Trump Orders Birthright Citizenship Restrictions, Defies Supreme Court

President Trump signed two executive orders Thursday targeting birthright citizenship and commercial birth tourism, marking his second attempt to circumvent the 14th Amendment after the Supreme Court rejected his broader Inauguration Day order on June 30. The orders narrow citizenship eligibility for children born to foreign diplomatic staff, individuals classified as alien enemies or members of federally declared terrorist groups, those born in U.S. territories if Congress changes the law, and children born to mothers who “deceptively” enter the country specifically to give birth at commercial centers.

Trump’s administration contends these orders operate within existing constitutional exceptions to the 14th Amendment, claiming the Supreme Court’s June 30 decision still permits targeting birthright citizenship under long-recognized categories. The birth-tourism order weaponizes the concept of “fraudulent misrepresentation,” arguing that mothers who expressly and deceptively enter the U.S. for childbirth forfeit birthright protections, similar to revoking naturalized citizenship obtained by fraud. A second order directs the State Department and Department of Homeland Security to issue rules combating birth tourism domestically and abroad, despite U.S. law already prohibiting tourist visas obtained primarily for childbirth purposes.

Congressional Republicans frame birth tourism as a national security threat, with the House Oversight Committee investigating the industry in May and citing concerns that foreign expectant mothers from China and Russia present “potential national security and election integrity threats posed by adversarial nations.” Trump has personalized the issue, attacking wealthy foreign nationals and framing birthright citizenship as an undeserved privilege being exploited for profit, stating on Truth Social that birthright citizenship should not apply to “rich people from China” seeking to make their children U.S. citizens “FOR PAY.”

Legal experts including University of Virginia immigration law professor Amanda Frost rejected Trump’s framing, arguing that if birth tourism represents a genuine policy concern, enforcement of existing regulations suffices without dismantling birthright citizenship protections. The orders face certain legal challenges identical to those that eliminated Trump’s first executive order, as the 14th Amendment’s plain language grants citizenship to all persons born in the United States regardless of parental status. Trump has already demanded the Supreme Court grant him a rehearing after the court rejected his initial birthright citizenship order, exposing his pattern of defying judicial decisions that constrain his authority.

Estimates of children born through birth tourism range from thousands to tens of thousands, though congressional Republicans lack concrete evidence linking the practice to election interference or security breaches. The administration’s targeting of birth tourism through executive order, combined with its resistance to the Supreme Court’s June 30 ruling, demonstrates Trump’s commitment to expanding executive power over citizenship determinations regardless of constitutional limitations.



(Source: https://www.axios.com/2026/08/06/trump-birth-tourism-birthright-citizenship)

Trump EEOC Kills 60-Year Demographic Data Collection Rule

The Trump administration’s EEOC, controlled by a Republican majority, voted Tuesday to eliminate a 60-year-old federal requirement mandating that tens of thousands of private employers submit annual workforce demographic reports. The data collection, known as the EEO-1 form, has been mandatory since 1966 for companies with at least 100 employees and covers more than 50 million workers across 73,000 employers nationwide, tracking representation of women and racial minorities across job categories from executive positions to service roles.

EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, who has promoted complaints from white men and opposed diversity initiatives, justified the elimination by falsely claiming the reporting requirement costs employers “hundreds of millions of dollars” and encourages racial discrimination. Lucas argued companies use demographic data to justify discriminatory hiring practices, despite lack of evidence supporting this claim. Former Democratic EEOC commissioners directly contradicted Lucas, stating there is “little evidence that companies are routinely using employment data to engage in quotas or race-based hiring” and calling her justification “simply inaccurate and unsupported speculation.”

The data reveals white men hold 52.7% of executive and senior management roles despite comprising one-third of the overall workforce, while Black and Hispanic women remain drastically underrepresented in senior positions. Women hold 34.5% of executive roles, up from 29.2% a decade earlier. The EEOC has used this data for 60 years to identify discrimination patterns, guide enforcement priorities, and inform investigations into the 88,000 workplace discrimination complaints it receives annually. The Trump administration did not publicly release the 2024 data it collected and has blocked collection for 2025.

The move, recommended by Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s authoritarian policy blueprint, dismantles a civil rights tool that survived 10 consecutive administrations. Democratic EEOC Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal, the sole Democrat remaining after Trump’s loyalty purges, voted against elimination, warning the commission was “turning back time to a period before the civil rights movement” and stripping the agency of its ability to protect workers. Kotagal signaled the data collection could be reinstated under future leadership.

Some large companies have already begun withdrawing their own diversity disclosures. Twenty-four companies in the S&P 100 stopped disclosing EEO-1 data in 2025 after releasing it previously, though 60 S&P 100 companies still chose transparency. Companies remain legally required under Title VII to retain demographic records subject to EEOC demand during discrimination investigations, and employment discrimination lawsuits continue regardless of federal reporting requirements.



(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-donald-trump-democratic-new-york-republican-b3019049.html)

Trump Demands the Supreme Court Give Him a Do-Over

President Donald Trump demanded Wednesday that the U.S. Supreme Court grant him a rehearing in the birthright citizenship case after the court rejected his executive order striking down citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants and visa holders. The 6-3 decision upheld the 14th Amendment’s clear language granting citizenship to all persons born in the United States, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the majority that the constitutional text is unambiguous. Trump’s demand for immediate rehearing follows his loss in Trump v. Barbara, where four justices signaled they do not believe the Constitution necessarily bestows citizenship on people born in the U.S., exposing the court’s extremist drift.

On Truth Social, Trump falsely claimed that billboards at the southern border advertise “birthright citizenship with deliveries starting at $4000,” asserting this constitutes a crime that invalidates the court’s ruling. Trump’s false characterization contradicts his own administration’s policies: in April 2026, he introduced a “gold card” visa for foreign nationals paying at least $1 million, which explicitly fast-tracks citizenship pathways for wealthy immigrants. This hypocrisy demonstrates Trump weaponizes the courts to circumvent constitutional protections when they conflict with his authoritarian agenda.

Trump’s demand for immediate rehearing and his subsequent pressure on Congress to overturn the 14th Amendment reflect his systematic assault on constitutional limits and independent judicial authority. His attacks on the Supreme Court’s decision, combined with his demands to remake institutions through loyalty purges and judicial remaking, advance his model of permanent executive power unchecked by law or democratic processes.



(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump/trump-demands-the-supreme-court-give-him-a-do-over-asks-for-a-rehearing-immediately/)its and independent judicial authority. His attacks on the Supreme Court’s decision, combined with his demands to remake institutions through loyalty purges and judicial remaking, advance his model of permanent executive power unchecked by law or democratic processes.

Trump Celebrates Supreme Court Ruling Expanding Presidential Firing Power

Donald Trump celebrated a Supreme Court ruling that expanded presidential authority to fire Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioners, claiming the decision overturned 90 years of precedent and "greatly increasing Presidential Power." Trump had fired Biden-appointee Rebecca Slaughter from the FTC in 2025, citing her service as "inconsistent with the Administration's priorities," and the Court's 6-3 decision on Monday upheld his authority to do so.

In a separate ruling, the Supreme Court limited Trump's power by preventing him from firing Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook, preserving the central bank's independence from executive removal authority. Trump had fired Cook in August after Federal Housing Finance Agency chief Bill Pulte accused her of mortgage fraud; Cook has denied the charge. Trump vowed to pursue "appropriate action immediately" and claimed Cook committed "wrongdoing," while Pulte, now interim head of the Department of National Intelligence, reiterated his belief that Cook "will be indicted for mortgage fraud."

It's important to note that Trump has falsely claimed mail-in voting is "really dishonest"; it is a legitimate voting method used by legitimate voters, including Trump himself.

All evidence shows fraud rates are tiny. He also falsely described what Jimmy Carter and a Carter-led 2005 commission said about mail-in ballots. Carter didn't say "you can't have them," and the commission didn't declare cheating inevitable. Additionally, Trump falsely claimed, "We're the only nation that does birthright citizenship," though about three dozen countries provide automatic citizenship to people born on their soil.

CNN's Paula Reid explained the split outcome, noting that the FTC ruling favored Trump because the agency operates within the Executive branch, while the Federal Reserve maintains independence as a separate entity. The decisions represent conflicting judicial positions on the scope of presidential removal powers, with the Court granting Trump greater control over executive agencies while constraining his authority over the Fed.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-takes-victory-lap-over-supreme-court-case-greatly-increasing-presidential-power/)

Trump Calls America Stupid After Leaving Supreme Court Birthright Citizenship Hearing

President Donald Trump attended Supreme Court arguments regarding his administration’s attempt to eliminate birthright citizenship through executive order, then departed midway through proceedings. Trump’s Solicitor General John Sauer was completing his presentation when Trump left the chamber, and multiple justices appointed by Trump himself voiced skepticism about the administration’s constitutional arguments to strip automatic citizenship rights.

After the hearing concluded, Trump posted on Truth Social attacking the United States as “stupid” for permitting birthright citizenship, falsely claiming America stands alone in this practice. According to Pew Research Center data, 32 other nations maintain substantially similar birthright citizenship laws, predominantly in the Western Hemisphere, while approximately 50 additional countries employ more limited variations of the same principle.

The Supreme Court is currently deliberating whether Trump possesses unilateral executive authority to redefine citizenship standards through presidential order. The justices’ apparent reservations about the administration’s legal position, coupled with Trump’s public contempt for the nation’s founding constitutional framework, underscore the stakes of this proceeding, which will produce a decision by July.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/bulletin/news/trump-supreme-court-birthright-citizenship-debate-stupid-b2950293.html)

Miller Pushes States to Strip Education Rights from Undocumented

Stephen Miller, Trump’s senior immigration adviser, is orchestrating a campaign to dismantle the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by encouraging Republican-led states to deny public education funding to undocumented children. Miller raised this idea in a closed-door meeting with Texas lawmakers in Washington, citing congressional gridlock as justification for state-level action that would challenge the 1982 Supreme Court precedent in Plyler v. Doe, which mandated free public education for undocumented children as a constitutional right.

If enacted, Miller’s proposal would classify approximately one million children as members of a subordinate class excluded from mainstream society. As Justice William Brennan wrote in the Plyler decision, denying these children basic education forecloses their ability to contribute to the nation’s progress and violates the 14th Amendment’s guarantee that “The 14th Amendment to the Constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens.” Miller’s strategy aims to use state legislation as a testing ground to weaken federal constitutional protections, encouraging other Republican states and federal lawmakers to follow suit.

Miller’s assault on the 14th Amendment extends beyond education policy and represents a broader assault on the constitutional protections established after the Civil War. The 14th Amendment was designed as a political text to ensure equal protection and citizenship rights for all people, directly extending the prohibitions of the 13th Amendment against slavery and involuntary servitude. Miller’s crusade against immigration and his efforts to strip constitutional protections from vulnerable populations reveal an intent to fundamentally reshape American democracy by dismantling the legal and political framework designed to prevent the creation of subordinate classes.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/28/opinion/stephen-miller-birthright-citizenship-14th-amendment.html)

Trump Praises Kavanaugh as Hero After Tariff Ruling Loss

President Donald Trump praised Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh as his “new hero” on Saturday morning, along with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, after the Court voted 6-3 to strike down his emergency tariff authority on Friday. The decision included votes against Trump from Chief Justice John Roberts and two Trump-appointed justices, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, alongside the three Democratic-appointed justices. Trump’s public embrace of the three dissenters revealed his deliberate strategy to reward judicial loyalty and punish perceived disloyalty.

On Friday evening, Trump responded to the tariff ruling by attacking the majority justices, claiming their decision was “ridiculous” and that the justices who voted against him “should be ashamed of themselves.” He specifically targeted his own appointees Gorsuch and Barrett, claiming they violated an implicit obligation by ruling against him and complaining that “this never seems to happen with Democrats,” who he alleged vote as a bloc in their own interest regardless of the case merits.

Trump’s escalating posts throughout Friday night revealed his transactional view of judicial appointments. He complained that he did not appoint Chief Justice Roberts, blaming Roberts for allowing “foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years to continue to do so.” His final evening post urged Republicans to “Unite, stick together, and WIN,” framing judicial independence as party disloyalty rather than constitutional obligation.

By Saturday morning, Trump shifted to praising the three justices who sided with him, declaring Kavanaugh his “new hero” and asserting without evidence that all three dissenters wanted to “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.” This pattern of public reward and punishment for judicial decisions directly contradicts the principle of an independent judiciary, positioning judges as political operatives accountable to the executive.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-wakes-up-blurting-praise-for-my-new-hero-and-its-about-his-devastating-court-loss/)

Trump Claims States Are Federal Agents in Elections

President Trump declared on Tuesday that states function as “agents for the federal government in elections,” advancing his push to federalize election administration. During an Oval Office signing ceremony, Trump told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins that the federal government should take over elections from states he deemed incapable of running them honestly, specifically naming Atlanta and other Democratic-led cities as sites of “horrible corruption.” Trump’s assertion contradicts the Constitution, which assigns election administration to state and local officials with limited federal involvement.

Trump framed federal takeover as necessary to ensure honest elections, stating that if states “can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.” When pressed by Collins on constitutional constraints, Trump dismissed them, declaring states “can administer the election, but they have to do it honestly.” This demand for federal control extends Trump’s pattern of weaponizing federal authority against election officials, mirroring his sustained efforts to delegitimize the 2020 election and intimidate state administrators into compliance with his directives.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later reframed Trump’s “nationalize the voting” language as advocacy for the SAVE Act, which would require proof of citizenship for voter registration. However, noncitizens are already barred from voting in federal elections, making the legislation redundant. The move represents Trump’s broader strategy to impose new voting restrictions ahead of midterm elections under the guise of election security.

The statement follows an FBI seizure last week of election materials from Fulton County, Georgia, in connection with alleged voter fraud claims that have been repeatedly debunked. Legal experts, including UCLA law professor Rick Hasen, characterized such federal intervention as a dramatic escalation in federal control over state-run election infrastructure and warned of further interference in 2026 elections. Trump’s repeated false claims of election fraud and his push for federal dominance over election administration establish the groundwork for authoritarian control over voting mechanisms.

Trump’s assertion that states are federal agents in elections directly contradicts established constitutional law and democratic practice. His pattern of attacking election officials who refuse his demands, combined with federal actions targeting state election materials, demonstrates his intent to consolidate power over election administration and establish federal override of state election systems, dismantling the institutional safeguards that protect democratic elections from executive manipulation.

(Source: https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/03/politics/trump-nationalize-elections-states?Date=20260204&Profile=CNN+Politics&utm_content=1770166729&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwdGRjcAPxrotleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe_TP6JxjJ8F0XeylqLLR_PnMmKiHjepIwMfFSOkoZjpuKIlcOuE0eA99g3Kc_aem_XKBW8wXEdeRvaH0xj02M9A)

FBI Agent Resigns as DOJ Blocks Renee Good Shooting Probe

FBI supervisor Tracee Mergen resigned from the Minneapolis field office after Washington leadership pressured her to abandon a civil rights investigation into ICE officer Jonathan Ross, who fatally shot 37-year-old Renee Good on January 7. Such inquiries are standard procedure following officer-involved shootings. The Trump administration weaponized the Justice Department by instead investigating Good and her partner for alleged ties to left-wing protest groups, prompting at least six senior prosecutors in the Minneapolis U.S. attorney’s office to resign in protest.

Senior Justice Department officials have stated there are no plans to investigate whether Ross used excessive force when he fired multiple shots at the unarmed mother sitting in her vehicle. Federal investigators refused to cooperate with state and local Minnesota prosecutors seeking to open their own inquiry into the shooting. The New York Times video analysis found no evidence supporting Trump administration officials’ claims that Good attempted to ram Ross with her Honda Pilot, yet they publicly labeled her a “domestic terrorist.”

The Justice Department simultaneously opened investigations into Minnesota Democratic elected officials, including Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, scrutinizing whether they conspired to obstruct Trump’s immigration enforcement through public statements. Subpoenas were issued this week to their offices and St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her’s office as part of this effort.

The department prosecuted three protesters—Nekima Levy-Armstrong, Chauntyll Louisa Allen, and William Kelly—charging them with conspiracy for interrupting a church service to protest a pastor’s apparent ICE work, alleging they “intimidated, harassed, oppressed and terrorized the parishioners.” Federal judges denied prosecutors’ requests to detain the three while awaiting trial.

These actions reflect a coordinated strategy by the Trump administration’s Justice Department to shield federal immigration enforcement from oversight, punish Democratic critics of ICE operations, and criminalize protest activity opposing deportation policies, while Trump falsely claimed protesters were paid agitators.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/23/us/fbi-agent-ice-shooting-renee-good.html)

Trump Hires Beauty Salon Owner Mora Namdar to Decide Who to Ban From U.S.

Donald Trump appointed Mora Namdar, a Texas-based beauty salon owner and attorney, as assistant secretary for consular affairs, giving her authority over visa approvals, revocations, and decisions about who enters the United States. Namdar, 46, owns the Bam salon chain in Dallas, Fort Worth, and Plano, offering blowouts starting at $45 and makeup sessions at $55, while simultaneously operating a one-woman law firm she announced closing on Christmas Day. She previously held an interim position in the State Department’s Middle East and North Africa bureau during Trump’s first term in 2020.

Namdar’s Senate confirmation this month elevates a politically connected operative with no demonstrated expertise in immigration or consular affairs to control visa adjudications affecting millions of foreigners. In testimony, she aligned visa decisions with Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s national security framing, stating that consular officers can revoke visas for individuals who “undermine” U.S. foreign policy, a standard potentially weaponizable against political opponents and critics.

Namdar contributed to Project 2025, Trump’s policy blueprint, by authoring a section attacking the U.S. Agency for Global Media—which operates Voice of America and Radio Free Europe—accusing it of “espionage-related security risks” and “anti-U.S. talking points,” and calling for its reform or closure. Her appointment operationalizes the “personnel is policy” strategy documented by PBS, which found the administration has implemented approximately half of Project 2025’s agenda through ideological staffing choices.

Her interim leadership of the State Department’s Near Eastern affairs bureau triggered internal concerns about management and morale according to multiple outlets. Namdar now oversees implementation of the administration’s ban on citizens from various European countries announced Wednesday, which Trump and Rubio framed as punishment for “egregious” social media censorship of “American viewpoints,” with additional bans promised.

This appointment exemplifies Trump’s strategy of installing operatives committed to Project 2025’s authoritarian goals across government agencies controlling speech and entry. Paired with FCC chairman Brendan Carr—another Project 2025 architect now pushing regulatory rollbacks and culture-war “censorship” narratives—Namdar’s position consolidates power to silence dissent and control who accesses the United States based on political loyalty rather than law.

(Source: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-hires-beauty-salon-owner-mora-namdar-to-decide-who-to-ban-from-us/)

1 2