Trump plans to attend oral arguments in Supreme Court birthright citizenship case

Both the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Historical Society have said there is no official record of any sitting president attending oral arguments.

March 31, 2026, 6:54 PM EDT / Updated March 31, 2026, 10:34 PM EDT

President Donald Trump said he plans to take the extraordinary step of attending Supreme Court oral arguments Wednesday in a case that could end birthright citizenshipin the U.S.

"I'm going," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday. "Because I have listened to this argument for so long."

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later confirmed to NBC News that Trump plans to be there Wednesday morning when Supreme Court justices hear arguments on the constitutionalityof a January 2025 executive order he signed that seeks to limit birthright citizenship to people who have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or a legal permanent resident.

Both the court and the nonprofit Supreme Court Historical Society said in October that there is no official record of any sitting president having attended oral arguments at the high court.

Trump attended the formal ceremonies at the court confirming his Supreme Court appointees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, but he has never been there before for arguments.

Trump would be present weeks after his attacks on justices following the court's ruling against his tariffs. At the time, he called justices "disloyal to the Constitution." In the days leading up to oral arguments in that case, Trump indicated he might attend them at the Supreme Courtbut ended up not going.

Richard Pildes, a professor of constitutional law at New York University, said Trump's presence during oral arguments "certainly raises the temperature of the argument, which might be the President’s intent."

"The case is about the powers of the presidency as an institution," Pildes said in an email to NBC News. "By showing up in person, the President would instead be personalizing the case, as if it’s a personal confrontation between him and the justices."

He added that presidents have avoided attending oral arguments because there is an understanding that the court's decisions apply to the presidency as an institution, not to just an individual president's time in office.

“They have understood it’s not good for the country to up the level of confrontation by representing the dispute as a more personalized one through showing up in person,” Pildes said.

While Trump's presence would be unorthodox, he is by no means the first president to publicly comment on a pending case tied closely to a White House agenda. President Barack Obama drew criticism in 2012 after he said the Supreme Court would be taking an “unprecedented, extraordinary step” if it struck down the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

Chief Justice John Roberts has worked hard to keep the Supreme Court independent from the two other branches of government, frequently speaking out against threats to and attacks on the judiciary. Many of those attacks have come from Trump, the head of the executive branch.

"The problem sometimes is that the criticism can move from a focus on legal analysis to personalities," Roberts said March 17. "And you see from all over, I mean, not just any one political perspective on it, that it's more directed in a personal way, and that, frankly, can be actually quite dangerous."

"Personally directed hostility is dangerous and has got to stop," he added.

The Supreme Court agreed in December to hear the case after lower courts ruled against Trump's plan to end automatic birthright citizenship for almost anyone born in the U.S.

The 14th Amendment has long been interpreted to protect birthright citizenship, as it states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

The Trump administration is pushing back against the longtime interpretation of that clause.

(https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/trump-plans-attend-oral-arguments-birthright-citizenship-case-rcna266117

Trump Is Right on Birthright Citizenship

The 14th Amendment’s authors would exclude illegal and visiting aliens from U.S. ‘jurisdiction.’

(https://archive.is/JxPh9

WSJ

Trump Is Right on Birthright Citizenship

The 14th Amendment’s authors would exclude illegal and visiting aliens from U.S. ‘jurisdiction.’

https://archive.is/JxPh9

Richard Grenell

@RichardGrenell

NBC News isn’t saying she is a Democrat.

When there’s a scandal with a Republican, the party affiliation is always in the headline.

#themoreyoukno

NBC News

@NBCNews

·Mar 27

BREAKING: House panel finds Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick guilty of 25 ethics counts after she was charged with stealing millions in FEMA.

https://nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/ethics-committee-finds-rep-sheila-cherfilus-mccormick-guilty-violating-rcna265459?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma&taid=69c68fb2802c9700014796c9&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

11:50 AM · Mar 27, 2026

·

346.9K

Views

https://x.com/RichardGrenell/status/2037557926722724150

>24451406

(They hardly ever agree with Trump)

WSJ: Trump Is Right on Birthright Citizenship

The 14th Amendment’s authors would exclude illegal and visiting aliens from U.S. ‘jurisdiction.’

President Trump’s executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of nonresident aliens goes before the Supreme Court Wednesday, and conventional wisdom has it that the president will lose in Trump v. Barbara. If the court stays true to the original meaning of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause, however, the conventional wisdom will prove wrong.

The clause grants citizenship to persons who meet two conditions: birth in the U.S. and being “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. The dispute is over the meaning of the latter term. Everyone agrees that it excludes at least three classes: children of diplomats, of soldiers from an invading army, and of American Indians maintaining tribal relations. In each of these categories, the status of the child depended on the status of the parent.

The constitutional debate is about the original concept embodied in the text that explains these exclusions and whether that concept embraces or excludes children born on U.S. soil to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily in the U.S. The court has never squarely addressed this question.

Before Mr. Trump’s executive order, what originalist scholarship existed on the original meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction” was sporadic and lightly tested if at all. The past year has produced an explosion of originalist scholarship on both sides. The justices are now in a good position to decide which side has presented the stronger originalist case.

Kurt Lash of the University of Richmond has examined the congressional debates over the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866. That act declared that “all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power” are citizens. The 14th Amendment was intended to constitutionalize, not alter, the Civil Rights Act. Congress re-enacted the same language after the 14th Amendment was adopted, suggesting an identical operation. But the drafters of the 14th Amendment saw a need for constitutional language that more clearly excluded the children of tribal Indians.

Sen. Lyman Trumbull (R., Ill.), who managed the Citizenship Clause in the upper chamber, explained that “subject to the jurisdiction” meant “not owing allegiance to anybody else,” whether to a tribe or a foreign power. Rep. John Bingham (R., Ohio), the moving force behind the 14th Amendment, used the same framework, referring after ratification to persons born in the U.S. “and not owing allegiance to any foreign power.” These statements, and others Mr. Lash identified, demonstrate how leading Republicans explained the concept the text was meant to capture: birth plus full political membership….

https://archive.is/JxPh9

Two drunk hoe’s on the plane were dragged off the plane and they still fought to stay on

https://youtu.be/XylOvJm7UDk

Jeremy

@Jeremybtc

Anthropic accidentally leaked their entire source code yesterday. What happened next is one of the most insane stories in tech history.

> Anthropic pushed a software update for Claude Code at 4AM.

> A debugging file was accidentally bundled inside it.

> That file contained 512,000 lines of their proprietary source code.

> A researcher named Chaofan Shou spotted it within minutes and posted the download link on X.

> 21 million people have seen the thread.

> The entire codebase was downloaded, copied and mirrored across GitHub before Anthropic's team had even woken up.

> Anthropic pulled the package and started firing DMCA takedowns at every repo hosting it.

> That's when a Korean developer named Sigrid Jin woke up at 4AM to his phone blowing up.

> He is the most active Claude Code user in the world with the Wall Street Journal reporting he personally used 25 billion tokens last year.

> His girlfriend was worried he'd get sued just for having the code on his machine.

> So he did what any engineer would do.

> He rewrote the entire thing in Python from scratch before sunrise.

> Called it claw-code and Pushed it to GitHub.

> A Python rewrite is a new creative work. DMCA can't touch it.

> The repo hit 30,000 stars faster than any repository in GitHub history.

> He wasn't satisfied. He started rewriting it again in Rust.

> It now has 49,000 stars and 56,000 forks.

> Someone mirrored the original to a decentralised platform with one message, "will never be taken down."

> The code is now permanent. Anthropic cannot get it back.

Anthropic built a system called Undercover Mode specifically to stop Claude from leaking internal secrets. Then they leaked their own source code themselves. You cannot make this up.

Anthropic leaked source code for their Claude Code tool (512k lines), not the company's entire codebase. The post exaggerates details like unverified "fastest GitHub repo" claims and the developer's personal story. Core events are real but dramatized.

cnbc.com/2026/03/31/ant…

fortune.com/2026/03/31/ant…

cybernews.com/security/anthr…

Proof Trump and Hegseth made a great decision

https://x.com/Jeremybtc/status/2039077799643005198

>>24451555

Pelican

@PelicanAI_

This is partly true, but heavily exaggerated.

What appears well supported is that Anthropic accidentally exposed a large chunk of Claude Code’s source through a bundled source-map file in npm package version2.1.88; multiple outlets reported roughly 512,000 lines across about 1,900 files, andAnthropic told Decrypt it was “a release packaging issue caused by human error,” not a breach. It also appears true that Chaofan Shou was among the first to spot it and post a download link on X, and that mirrors and forks spread quickly afterward.

The middle of the story is directionally plausible but not fully nailed down. Reports say Anthropic pulled the package and that mirrors were hit with DMCA takedowns, while a repo called claw-code by Sigrid Jin / instructkr does exist, presents itself as a Python clean-room rewrite, cites the Wall Street Journal’s note that Jin used 25 billion Claude Code tokens last year, and says a Rust port is in progress. The GitHub page currently shows about 51.7k stars and 56.6k forks, so the “49,000 stars and 56,000 forks” claim is now in the ballpark, though I did not find a primary source proving it was the fastest repo in GitHub history to hit 30,000 stars. That “history” claim is repeated by the repo’s own README and by Decrypt, but I would treat it as unverified marketing unless GitHub itself confirms it.

The weakest parts are the more cinematic details. I found support for 16 million views on Chaofan Shou’s thread from Decrypt, not 21 million. I also found reporting and summaries around “Undercover Mode” in the leaked code, but not a primary Anthropic statement confirming the broader dramatic framing around it. And “Anthropic leaked their entire source code” is overstated: the leak appears to involve Claude Code’s CLI/harness source, not Anthropic’s model weights or the company’s whole codebase. So the clean verdict is: real leak, real scramble, real mirrors, real rewrite project — but the viral post inflates several numbers and overstates the scope.

5:49 PM · Mar 31, 2026

·

226.8K

Blah blah blah they still fucked up

https://x.com/PelicanAI_/status/2039097858721276067

>>24451590

That’s weird, KEK left leaning orgs getting attacked? That would be a first , maybe China or Iran are hacking

LIVE

updated 15 minutes ago

Trump says US to leave Iran ‘pretty quickly’ ahead of address

Summary

• US President Donald Trump told Reuters the United States will be “out of Iran pretty quickly” but could return for “spot hits” if needed.

• US President Donald Trump told The Telegraph he is considering pulling the United States out of NATO, citing frustration with allies over the Iran conflict.

• US President Donald Trump told reporters the US “will be leaving [Iran] very soon” and that military action could end within “two or three weeks.”

• Iranian media said the former US Embassy in Tehran was damaged in early Wednesday strikes. The former embassy was turned into a museum after it was seized in November 1979 and has since been largely controlled by institutions linked to the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij.

• White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday that US President Donald Trump will address the nation on Wednesday night to provide an “important update” on Iran.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202604015564

Bibi is going to be pissed, he wanted to US for his WW. Fuck him

>>24451660

25 minutes ago

US to leave Iran ‘pretty quickly’, could return for strikes, Trump

US President Donald Trump told Reuters the United States will be “out of Iran pretty quickly” but could return for “spot hits” if needed.

He also said he is considering withdrawing the United States from NATO ahead of a planned address to the nation.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202604015564

(He should give a bill to Bibi for billions for dragging us in.)

>>24451669

I bet NATO members never thought he’d do it. Realistically why should the US protect EU countries that hate everything the US stands for!

>>24451676

1 hour ago

France says NATO not designed for Strait of Hormuz operations

NATO is not designed to carry out operations in the Strait of Hormuz, France’s junior army minister said on Wednesday.

“It is a military alliance concerned with the security of the Euro-Atlantic region. (he fails to say the agreement of all NATO countries to protect other NATO countries, Eu country armed harmed there). It is not designed to carry out operations in the Strait of Hormuz,” Alice Rufo said, adding such action could breach international law.

Her comments come after Donald Trump said he is considering pulling the United States out of NATO after allies did not back US military action against Iran.

(Sounds like the EU wanted out of NATO commitments. I sense they will regret their cowardly decision)

https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202604015564#202604017478

1 hour ago

Iran warned Bulgaria over US use of airports, ministry says

Iran warned Bulgaria not to allow the United Statesto use its airports for military operations linked to Iran, the foreign ministry said on Wednesday.

Deputy Foreign Minister Marin Raikov confirmed Sofiareceived a note (threat)from Tehran last month protesting US military aircraft at a Bulgarian airport.

He said Bulgaria is not involved in the conflict and no combat aircraft are being loaded in the country for operations in the region.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202604015564#202604017478

If these countries obey they will prove that Iran can threaten the world and get away with it. They are all cowards if they oblige! There’s a sad state of affairs in European countries and elsewhere.

2 hours ago

EXCLUSIVE ==KEKKITY MESS

IRGC takes de facto control of Iran government amid deepening power struggle(Trump is right they want out and are falling apart.)

11 hours ago

Rising tensionsbetween the Pezeshkian administration andIran’s military leadership have pushed the president into a “complete political deadlock,” with theRevolutionary Guard effectively assuming control over key state functions, informed sources told Iran International.

The IRGC has blocked presidential appointments and decisions while erecting a security perimeter around the core of power, effectively sidelining the government from executive control.

Efforts by Masoud to appoint a new intelligence minister last Thursday collapsed under direct pressure from IRGCchief-commander Ahmad Vahidi, sources with knowledge of the situation told Iran International.

All proposed candidates, including Hossein Dehghan, were rejected. Vahidi is said to have insisted that,given wartime conditions, all critical and sensitive leadership positions must be selected and managed directly by the IRGCuntil further notice.

Under Iran’s political system,presidents have traditionally nominated intelligence ministers only after securingthe approvalof the Supreme Leader, who holds ultimate authorityover key security portfolios.

However, withthe condition and whereabouts of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei unclearin recent weeks, theIRGC is now effectively blocking the presidentfrom advancing its.preferred candidate, further consolidatingits grip over the state’s security apparatus.

Security cordon around Khamenei Jr.

Pezeshkian has repeatedly sought an urgent meeting with Mojtaba Khamenei in recent days, but all requests have gone unanswered, with no contact established.

Informed sources saya “military council” composed of senior IRGC officers now exercises full controlover thecore decision-making structure, enforcing a securitycordon around Mojtaba Khameneiandpreventing government reportson the country’s situationfrom reaching him.

Speculation has also emerged regarding whether MojtabaKhamenei’s health condition may be contributing to the current power dynamics.

Efforts to remove Hejazi

At the same time, anunprecedented internal crisisis reportedlyunfolding within Mojtaba Khamenei’s inner circle.

Some close associates are said to bepushing to remove Ali Asghar Hejazi, a powerful security figure in the Supreme Leader’s office.

The tensions are rooted in Hejazi’s explicit opposition to Mojtaba Khamenei’s potential succession. He had previously warned members of the Assembly ofExperts that Mojtaba lacks the necessary qualifications for leadershipand argued thathereditary succession is incompatible with the principlesoutlined by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, according to informed sources.

Hejazi reportedly cautioned that elevating Mojtaba would effectively hand full control of the country tothe IRGC. and permanently sideline civilian institutions.==

In the first week of the ongoing war, Israeli media reported that Hejazi had been targeted in an airstrike in Tehran. However, later reports indicated that he survived the attack.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/202604015321

>>24451779

Oops Iran leaders are losing it!

Pezeshkian allies push back as criticism adds to signs of internal rift

Fresh public criticism of remarks by President MasoudPezeshkian and the defensive response from his inner circle appear to add to signs of a widening rift between the government and the Revolutionary Guards over the conduct of the war and its economic fallout.==

In a post on X, Hamidreza Tabatabaei, deputy forcommunications and information at the president’s office, pushed back at attackson Pezeshkian and pointedly asked:“How can second-tier figures pontificate on behalf of the political system, but Dr.Pezeshkian has no right to express an opinion?”

His wording appeared tosuggest that even the president is being denied room to speak.

Pezeshkian, the president’s son and adviser, also responded to criticism of the president’s recent remarks.

“I do not understand the meaning of these criticisms; are we not seeking to meet conditions and obtain guarantees?Or are we seeking war until the complete destruction of America and Israel?” he said.

The backlash from hardline pro-government accounts was sharp.

MortezaRohani wrote that the president’s media team had burned “two main levers against America,” adding:“Oil got cheaper, and the US market turned green. This scale of sabotage is not the result of ignorance alone. Security institutions should be sensitive.”

While limited in themselves, the exchanges support earlier reporting that tensions have deepened between Pezeshkian’s administration and the Guards over war policy, diplomacy and the economy.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202604015564#202604017478