A major heat wave is affecting much of the eastern half of the United States this week, bringing dangerous conditions to multiple World Cup matches.
The first round of July Social Security payments for retirees, now capped at $5,181, will be issued in seven days. When will payments arrive? Retirees born on or before the 10th of a month will receive this payment on Wednesday, July 8. The second round will go out on July 15 to those born between […]
Republicans on Capitol Hill split Tuesday over how to respond after the Supreme Court rejected President Donald Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship through his Day 1 executive order, The Hill reported.In a 6-3 decision in Trump v. Barbara, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to nearly all children born on U.S. soil, even those born to parents in the country illegally. Roberts was joined by fellow conservative Amy Coney Barrett and the three liberal justices. Justice Brett Kavanaugh also voted to block the order but reasoned it violated a federal statute rather than the Constitution.Trump urged Congress to act by legislation, posting, "No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary!" But several GOP figures with legal backgrounds broke with him, saying only an amendment could do it. House Speaker Mike Johnson said the ruling means "you have to amend the Constitution to fix that." Sen. Mike Lee, a former Alito clerk, wrote, "We're going to need a constitutional amendment."Sen. Eric Schmitt said he would file legislation walking through a "door" he argued Kavanaugh's opinion left open, while also pursuing an amendment. Sen. Rand Paul pointed to an amendment he filed earlier this year. Others favored narrower steps: Sen. John Cornyn touted his bill targeting "birth tourism," and Sen. Tom Cotton called for "more deportations, a more secure border, and more prosecutions of foreign criminals."The amendment path faces long odds, needing two-thirds of both chambers and three-quarters of the states. Even some conservatives conceded it is out of reach. As commentator Megyn Kelly wrote, "It takes 38 states. We'll never get that."The court issued two other rulings on its final decision day, allowing states to bar transgender girls from girls' and women's sports and striking down limits on coordinated party spending as a First Amendment violation.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) attempted an end-run strategy to pass President Donald Trump's anti-voting-rights SAVE America Act through Congress — only for a contingent of Republicans to block it and deal him a fresh humiliation. And MS NOW commenters were quick to react."Mike Johnson just tried to get the SAVE America Act through the House," said anchor Katy Tur, quoting Punchbowl News' Jake Sherman that it "went down in flames" and turning to reporter Mychael Schnell. "What exactly happened?"For starters, said Schnell, Johnson attempted to force it through by attaching it to the annual defense budget bill, or NDAA, "a very core, important piece of must-pass legislation." It was a plan concocted by conservative hardliners, led by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL)."She has taken it upon herself, amid the President's pressure campaign, to pass this bill, to say that she would not pass any bills in the House unless the Senate acted on this legislation," said Schnell. "The Senate left town, so that opportunity was off the table" — but she said she would stop her protest if it were put to a vote in the House.Meanwhile, Schnell said, "Speaker Johnson chose a different route, trying to combine the two during this procedural vote," only for 14 House Republicans to block it, leading to the failure of a routine procedural vote.The bottom line, she continued, is that "it's a massive embarrassment and a blow to Speaker Johnson. It's never good when a rule vote fails. But the interesting thing here ... is that the left hand isn't really aware of what the right hand is doing when you talk about Republican leaders, because last week, President Trump had taken to Truth Social and said he did not want these Republicans in the House to be holding hostage these procedural rules in the NDAA in order to get the SAVE America bill passed," and Luna and Johnson still did it anyway.As a consequence of all this, said Schnell, "the House floor is right now paralyzed" and "there is still no movement in the SAVE America Act." There's simply no path to get it passed, she said — "but conservatives and the president himself are not yet ready to accept that reality." - YouTube www.youtube.com
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right to birthright citizenship as enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, despite President Donald Trump's best efforts to eliminate it.The ruling in Trump v. Barbara was handed down on Tuesday morning, as the high court published its final rulings. Speaking about the arguments before the court, Georgetown University School of Law Professor Steve Vladeck told CNN that there are two different questions in the case. The first is the constitutional question and the reality of the 14th Amendment being adopted over 150 years ago. The high court conservatives have considered themselves "originalists" in the past to justify their support for a verbatim reading of the Constitution in some instances. "But there's a narrower way out in the case," Vladeck said. "In 1940 and in 1952, Congress enacted statutes that basically codified, wrote into federal law, the Supreme Court's earlier interpretation of this clause called Wong Kim Ark."The 1889 case U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, in which a man was denied entry after traveling abroad under the Chinese Exclusion Act. Vladeck explained that the Court could easily say that the executive order signed by President Donald Trump is "inconsistent with the statutes without even getting into the heart of the constitutional question."He said that it's one of the uphill climbs for the administration because they have to win on both. At the time of the oral arguments before the Court, the justices didn't seem to agree with the administration's assessment. The one stand-out moment was when Justice Samuel Alito cited an old saying by Justice Antonin Scalia involving the so-called "microwave philosophy." His comment goes that one can't use a legal excuse, saying that they can't be guilty of stealing a microwave because microwaves weren't written into the U.S. Constitution at the time. Alito claimed that birthright citizenship wasn't even known at the time of the Constitution's writing. Michigan University Law School Professor Leah Litman responded to the sentiment on BlueSky, writing, "Sam Alito is open to the federal government's arguments on birthright citizenship. His [question] is putting forward a framework to justify him saying, 'Well, illegal immigration didn't exist at the time of the 14th Amendment so you and I can just do whatever we want!'"
An England soccer fan has vanished while traveling to the US for the World Cup – with his anguished family fearing he may have gone missing during a layover in Spain. Michael Hewitt, 65, last spoke with his family in Barcelona on June 21, one day after jetting out of the UK for the tournament,...
The rhythm of the United States men's national team's Round of 32 game figures to be similar to its two group-stage wins.
Heartbreak was sent across from Boston Stadium, all the way across the Atlantic Ocean, to Deutschland after Germany was eliminated by Paraguay. Germany’s hopes of winning the World Cup came crumbling down when José Canale fired a penalty shot to seal Paraguay‘s victory in a 4-3 shootout in the Round of 32, to give Paraguay...
It was a devastating moment for Germany, which could have wrapped up the match with the goal and advanced in the tournament