“The Supreme Court on Friday blocked President Donald Trump from moving forward with deportations under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act for a group of immigrants in northern Texas, siding with Venezuelans who feared they were poised for imminent removal under the sweeping wartime authority,” CNN reports.

“The decision is a significant loss for Trump, who wants to use the law to speed deportations – and avoid the kind of review normally required before removing people from the country.”

NBC News: Supreme Court rules Trump administration must give Venezuelans more time to challenge deportation under Alien Enemies Act.

“The Supreme Court wrestled on Thursday with the Trump administration’s complaints that federal judges have exceeded their authority by temporarily blocking some of his policy moves for the whole country,” the New York Times reports.

“Several of the justices appeared torn between two concerns: They appeared skeptical that single district judges should have the power to freeze executive actions throughout the country.”

“But they also seemed troubled by the legality — and consequences — of the executive order underlying the case: An order issued by President Donald J. Trump on his first day in office ending birthright citizenship, or the practice of granting automatic citizenship to all babies born in the United States.”

Washington Post: Supreme Court divided over nationwide injunctions in birthright citizenship case.

New York Times: “For more than a century, most scholars and the courts have agreed that though the 14th Amendment was added to the Constitution after the Civil War, it was not, in fact, all about slavery. Instead, courts have held that the amendment extended citizenship not just to the children of former slaves but also to babies born within the borders of the United States.”

“The notion that the amendment might not do so was once considered an unorthodox theory, promoted by an obscure California law professor named John Eastman and his colleagues at the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank — the same professor who would later provide Mr. Trump with legal arguments he used to try to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.”

“The story of how the theory moved from the far edges of academia to the Oval Office and, on Thursday, to the Supreme Court, offers insight into how Mr. Trump has popularized legal theories once considered unthinkable to justify his immigration policies.”

“It has been a major impediment to President Trump’s agenda — the ability of a single federal judge in a single district to block a policy across the country,” the New York Times reports.

“On issue after issue, the White House has been stopped by judges from carrying out Mr. Trump’s initiatives while they are litigated in court, including his ability to withhold funds from schools with diversity programs, to relocate transgender women in federal prisons and to remove deportation protections from hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan migrants.”

“On Thursday, the Supreme Court will take up one such case, with potentially major implications for the power of the judicial branch.”

“On Thursday, the Supreme Court will take up a case that could decide how quickly President Donald Trump can implement his second term agenda as it hears arguments about nationwide injunctions that allow a single judge to block a policy for the entire country,” CNN reports.

“The issue arises from an appeal challenging rulings that have blocked Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship, the longstanding practice based in the 14th Amendment of granting citizenship to any child born on US soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.”

Chief Justice John Roberts described the rule of law as “endangered” and warned against “trashing the justices,” but he didn’t point fingers directly at President Donald Trump or his allies for publicly excoriating judges who’ve ruled against aspects of Trump’s agenda, Politico reports.

Said Roberts: “The notion that rule of law governs is the basic proposition. Certainly as a matter of theory, but also as a matter of practice, we need to stop and reflect every now and then how rare that is, certainly rare throughout history, and rare in the world today.”

CNN: “When the Supreme Court gathers Thursday to hear oral argument in a high-profile emergency appeal involving Trump’s birthright citizenship order, the justices will technically be considering a procedural question about whether lower courts overstepped their authority by blocking the president’s efforts nationwide.”

“But the court’s answer to that question will have enormous on-the-ground consequences, even for people who are in the United States legally.”

“The Trump administration’s global tariffs face their first major legal test this week when a little-known Manhattan court considers one of the president’s most sweeping assertions of executive power,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

“A three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade will hear arguments Tuesday on whether to halt the levies, which have unleashed a trade war with the world and threaten to upend the global economy.”

“The federal court, which has nationwide jurisdiction over tariff and trade disputes, operates for the most part in obscurity, rarely garnering a mention in major publications and staying off the radar of most attorneys.”

“Federal judges say unsolicited pizza deliveries to jurists’ homes that began in February may number in the hundreds across at least seven states, prompting increased security concerns and a demand from a Senate leader for a Justice Department investigation,” the Washington Post reports.

“Many of the deliveries have gone to judges presiding over lawsuits challenging the Trump administration’s policies.”

“Chief Justice John Roberts said Wednesday he doesn’t think about retiring, but he once asked two longtime friends to intervene if his health is ever in decline,” The Hill reports.

Said Roberts: “I’ve sat down with them and said, ‘I want at the appropriate time’ — because you don’t always notice that you’re slipping — ‘I want the two of you to tell me if it’s time to go.’ It was a long pause, and at once, the two of them said, ‘It’s time to go.’ So I said, ‘Alright, never mind.'”

He added: “I’m going out feet first.”

“Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson forcefully condemned attacks by President Donald Trump and his allies on judges who have blocked Trump administration policies, warning Thursday that the increasingly hostile rhetoric poses a dire threat to the country’s political fabric,” Politico reports.

Said Jackson: “The attacks are not random. They seem designed to intimidate those of us who serve in this critical capacity. The threats and harassment are attacks on our democracy, on our system of government. And they ultimately risk undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.”

Kate Shaw: “Federal courts, are limited in both power and reach. They are by design slow and reactive. They are not self-starters: They can rule only in cases properly before them, which means there needs to be a party experiencing a particular injury that is continuing or will imminently occur and that the judicial process can remedy…”

“Courts typically confront cases raising discrete questions, meaning there’s an atomistic nature to constitutional law and constitutional adjudication… They cannot act as roving guarantors of the rule of law.”

“There is nowhere in the constitution that talks about judicial supremacy. What you’re seeing is a court stepping in the middle of President Trump and the unitary theory, the executive or article II, his role as commander in chief.”

— Steve Bannon, in an interview with NPR.

“Republican lawmakers are feeling uncomfortable about President Trump’s escalating fight with the federal judiciary,” The Hill reports.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), who is up for reelection next year, said she found it “troubling.”

“FBI Director Kash Patel said Friday that the bureau had arrested a Milwaukee judge and charged her with obstructing an immigration arrest operation last week — the first known instance of the Justice Department prosecuting a local official for allegedly interfering with the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement,” the Washington Post reports.

“Patel announced the arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan in a post on the social media platform X, which he deleted moments after posting. The post accused Dugan of ‘intentionally misdirecting’ federal agents who arrived at the courthouse to detain an immigrant who was set to appear before her in an unrelated proceeding.”

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: “Multiple Milwaukee County judges confirmed that the arrest took place at the courthouse.”

“The Trump administration on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to allow it to enforce a ban on transgender service members in the military,” NBC News reports.