Abbie VanSickle

The justices will consider the constitutionality of President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented people and some temporary foreign visitors.

As the justices prepare to hear a landmark case about birthright citizenship, their family stories are a reminder that the law has shaped who can be an American.

The case focuses on Mississippi’s mail-in ballot law, but the outcome could upend similar rules in more than a dozen states and territories.

The administration has also sought to end deportation protections for other immigrant groups, including Syrians.

In a rare joint appearance, Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Brett M. Kavanaugh offered sharply different views on how the court should handle emergency requests.

A Republican congresswoman had asked the justices to preserve her New York City district, despite a lower-court ruling that it illegally diluted the power of minority voters.

The case involves a Texas man charged after agents found drugs and a gun in his home and tests the constitutionality of the federal law.

The former president’s son says he is watching closely as the justices on Monday hear a case testing the constitutionality of the federal gun law used to convict him.

The court agreed to revive a lawsuit by a Texas couple who claimed that tainted baby food purchased at Whole Foods had sickened their young son.

The trio warned of immediate chaos over refunds and trade deals. They also provided President Trump with a list of other possible avenues for imposing tariffs.

Lawyers for Representative Nicole Malliotakis, Republican of New York, asked the Supreme Court to block a ruling that would redraw her district lines.

The state’s Republican Party had asked the justices to step in and block the new congressional maps, which give an advantage to Democrats, before the midterms.

How four reporters are examining the most secretive branch of government — and the nine justices who shape the law.

The justices will hear arguments over whether a Hawaii law that imposes restrictions on carrying concealed weapons violates the Second Amendment.

The question in the case was not a mail-in ballot rule itself but whether political candidates have the right to challenge the rules governing the vote count in their election.