Questions about Thursday’s oral argument in the birthright citizenship dispute? We have (some) answers.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Wednesday morning read:

• Birthright citizenship dispute at the Supreme Court has broad implications for Trump’s agenda (Lawrence Hurley, NBC News)
• Trump’s Legal Strategy Has a Name (Andrew O’Donohue, The Atlantic)
• Remembering David Souter (Mark Movsesian, The Volokh Conspiracy)
• His great-grandfather enshrined birthright citizenship. Norman Wong is trying to save it. (David Nakamura, The Washington Post)
• Donald Trump Warns That Supreme Court Ruling Against Him Could Destroy US (Kate Plummer, Newsweek)

Coming up: On Thursday, May 15, the court expects to issue one or more opinions from the current term. The justices will then hear oral arguments in Trump v. CASA. We’ll be live at 9:30 a.m. EDT for the opinions and argument.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Tuesday morning read:

• In birthright citizenship case, US Supreme Court gets two controversies in one (Andrew Chung, Reuters)
• Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Allow Venezuelan Deportations to Resume (Abbie VanSickle, The New York Times)
• What’s At Stake As Trump’s Assault On Birthright Citizenship Heads To The Supreme Court (Althea Legaspi, Rolling Stone)
• Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship heads to the Supreme Court (Jean Lantz Reisz, The Conversation)
• With Trump’s ban on trans troops in effect, US tests lawful discrimination (Sara Pequeño, USA Today)

Coming up: On Thursday, May 15, the court expects to issue one or more opinions from the current term. The justices will then hear oral arguments in Trump v. CASA. We’ll be live at 9:30 a.m. EDT for the opinions and argument.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Monday morning read:

• Trump uses Supreme Court birthright citizenship case in bid to limit judges’ power (Maureen Groppe, USA Today)
• These pregnant moms eye Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship arguments with fear (John Fritze, CNN)
• David Souter Set an Example for the Supreme Court (Noah Feldman, Bloomberg)
• Despite Souter’s objection, SCOTUS should absolutely televise its public hearings (Jordan Rubin, MSNBC)
• Should Reporters Identify Judges by the President Who Nominated Them? (Linda Greenhouse, The New York Times)

Coming up: On Thursday, May 15, the court expects to issue one or more opinions from the current term. The justices will then hear oral arguments in Trump v. CASA. We’ll be live at 9:30 a.m. EDT for the opinions and argument.

The court announced this morning that Retired Associate Justice David Souter died yesterday at his home in New Hampshire. He was 85 years old.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Friday morning read:

• Retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter dies at 85 (Dan Mangan, CNBC)
• David H. Souter, Republican Justice Who Allied With Court’s Liberal Wing, Dies at 85 (Linda Greenhouse, The New York Times)
• Hegseth initiates ban on transgender troops after Supreme Court ruling (Alex Horton & Casey Parks, The Washington Post)
• The Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship case isn’t really about birthright citizenship (Ian Millhiser, Vox)
• A Way Out of SCOTUS Charter School Ruling Mess: Focus on Mission, Not Religion (Richard D. Kahlenberg, The 74)

Lawyers for a group of Venezuelan nationals urged the Supreme Court on Thursday to keep in place a ruling by a federal judge in San Francisco that prohibits Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem from ending their designation under a special immigration program giving them temporary protection from deportation. 

Granting the government’s request and putting the order by Senior U.S. District Judge Edward Chen on hold “would radically shift the status quo,” wrote Ahilan Arulanantham, a UCLA law professor representing the Venezuelan citizens. It would mean that “nearly 350,000 people would immediately lose the right to live and work in this country,” Arulanantham emphasized.