D. John Sauer

The Justice Department characterized an incident involving an Iranian missile threat and President Trump switching planes as an “assassination attempt” in a new court filing. U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer mentioned this event while submitting an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court to challenge a lower court’s block.

The Trump administration renewed its request for the U.S. Supreme Court to quickly decide on an executive order that would limit vote-by-mail, a measure requiring states to list voters and restrict postal delivery. The urgency increased after U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued an injunction blocking the order nationwide just before Election Day. Because of the tight timeline, the judge ruled the executive branch has no authority to regulate elections.

The Trump administration has urgently requested a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court regarding an executive order aimed at limiting vote-by-mail. This request became more urgent after a federal judge blocked the executive order nationwide, noting that the executive branch lacks authority to regulate elections. The original executive order sought to restrict ballot delivery and require states to list voters who intended to vote by mail.

The Trump administration renewed its request to the U.S. Supreme Court for a quick decision regarding an executive order that limits vote-by-mail. This came after a Massachusetts federal judge expanded an injunction nationwide, ruling that "the executive branch has no authority to regulate elections." The original executive order would have required states to provide voters lists and restrict the U.S. Postal Service from delivering ballots to those not on the list.

The Trump administration requested the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold an executive order restricting vote-by-mail, which was blocked by a district court and later denied by a federal appeals court. The appeals court ruled that the order violated state authority over elections, while the administration argued the order promotes election integrity. The case could impact states' preparations for November's midterm elections.

The Trump administration requested the Supreme Court to permit an executive order requiring a federal citizenship list for mail-in ballots ahead of midterms. Democratic officials in 23 states and D.C. challenged the order, arguing states control election rules. A lower court blocked the order, which the administration now seeks to overturn urgently.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment in Trump v. Barbara, rejecting arguments that it enables exploitation. The decision emphasized historical intent, while dissenting justices raised concerns about modern implications. The article highlights the economic and societal contributions of immigrant descendants, including their roles in business, government, and the military.

The Supreme Court is set to announce decisions on birthright citizenship, transgender sports, and political spending cases. Solicitor General D. John Sauer and other officials attended the session, with predictions suggesting Justice Kavanaugh might handle the transgender and political spending cases, while Chief Justice Roberts may address birthright citizenship.

The Supreme Court has advanced a water access dispute between Nebraska and Colorado over the construction of the Perkins County Canal, which Nebraska claims is necessary to secure water rights under a 1926 compact. Colorado opposes the project, arguing it lacks practical use and could harm shared water resources due to modern groundwater pumping challenges.

The Trump administration is requesting the Supreme Court to approve its expanded ICE detention policy, which requires mandatory detention for immigrants living in the U.S. for years without bond hearings. Federal district courts have largely rejected the policy as a violation of due process, but the administration argues for Supreme Court intervention due to conflicting appellate rulings.

The Supreme Court is set to review the legality of President Trump's attempt to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitian and Syrian migrants, a move that could affect over 1.3 million TPS holders in the U.S. The case, Mullin v. Doe, focuses on whether courts can review the administration's decision to revoke TPS without interagency review, with potential far-reaching implications for immigration policy.

The Supreme Court is set to review the legality of President Trump's attempt to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitian and Syrian migrants, affecting approximately 357,000 individuals. The case, Mullin v. Doe, centers on whether the Trump administration can terminate TPS without interagency review, with potential implications for over 1.3 million TPS holders nationwide.

The Supreme Court will decide whether the U.S. Department of Labor secretary must seek federal court approval to impose fines on employers violating agricultural visa rules. The government uses an in-house process, which a lower court ruled unconstitutional, prompting the Supreme Court to review the case. A ruling is expected by next year.

The article discusses the legal battle over President Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship, focusing on the interpretation of the 14th Amendment's 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' clause. The Supreme Court is considering whether this phrase excludes children of temporary residents, with opposing arguments from the Trump administration and the ACLU.