The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end automatic citizenship for some children born in the United States.

Trump signed the order on Jan. 20, 2025, after taking office. It sought to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents with temporary legal status or no legal documentation.

The court upheld a lower court ruling that found the order conflicted with the Constitution. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said the history of birthright citizenship runs from English common law through the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, and the court’s 1898 ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

“The trouble is that there is scant evidence for this dramatically revisionist view,” Roberts wrote. “The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land.” He added, “We keep that promise today.”

Roberts was joined by Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan.

Trump called the ruling “too bad for our country” and urged Congress to act. “Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship,” Trump wrote. “They will have my Complete and Total Support!”

Administration lawyers argued that the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause applies only to children whose parents are U.S. citizens or permanent residents. They said the amendment was written narrowly to address the status of formerly enslaved people and that Wong Kim Ark did not establish the modern practice of birthright citizenship.

Roberts said Congress had opportunities to limit birthright citizenship, including when it drafted the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, but did not do so.

In a concurring opinion, Jackson wrote that the 14th Amendment reflected broader principles already embedded in U.S. law and identity. In dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the majority’s account was “not historically accurate” and said the amendment had been “repurposed for political projects.” Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch also dissented.

Kavanaugh joined the majority but wrote separately that he did not believe the order violated the Constitution, though he said it conflicted with the Immigration and Nationality Act. He wrote that Congress could enact “new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country.”

The American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the order, welcomed the ruling. A May study by the Migration Policy Institute and Penn State said about 255,000 infants a year would be born in the U.S. without citizenship under the order, increasing the undocumented population by 2.7 million by 2045.

The Supreme Court will consider whether state and local bans on semiautomatic rifles, often called assault weapons, violate the Second Amendment.

The justices said Tuesday they will hear appeals over bans on AR-15-style and similar firearms in Connecticut and the Chicago area. Arguments are expected in the fall.

The case is the latest major gun dispute to reach the court since its 2022 ruling expanding Second Amendment rights prompted challenges to firearm laws across the country.

Similar laws are in effect in about a dozen states, including in areas covering New York, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C. Congress allowed a federal assault weapons ban to expire in 2004, but Democrats have backed renewing it after a series of mass shootings. States have continued to pass their own measures, including recent laws in Virginia and Rhode Island.

Connecticut enacted its law after a gunman used an AR-15 to kill 26 children and educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012. The state argued the firearms can be banned because they are similar to military-grade weapons and have been used in mass shootings.

“These laws are critical public safety measures, and they are consistent with the Second Amendment,” said Janet Carter, managing director of Second Amendment litigation at Everytown Law.

Gun rights groups argued that banning semiautomatic rifles is unconstitutional because millions of Americans legally own them.

“The Second Amendment protects arms in common use for lawful purposes, and it’s hard to argue that a type of rifle that potentially outnumbers Ford F-150 trucks in America doesn’t meet that standard,” said Adam Kraut, executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation.

Four conservative justices had previously signaled interest in taking up the issue. The ban in Cook County, Illinois, was first passed in 1993, and lower courts had upheld both laws.

“If the Second Amendment does not protect the most popular rifles in the country, it is hard to see how it protects any firearms at all,” aside from handguns kept in the home, the challengers wrote.

Cook County attorneys said the law is constitutional. “The trauma that assault weapon massacres have inflicted on the public at large has been staggering,” they wrote.

The court backed Second Amendment claims in two cases this term, striking down gun-carry restrictions in Hawaii and a federal ban on gun ownership by marijuana users. It has also upheld some limits, including a law barring people under domestic violence restraining orders from having guns.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Alan Dershowitz’s bid to revive his defamation lawsuit against CNN over its coverage of remarks he made while defending Donald Trump during the president’s first Senate impeachment trial in 2020.

The justices let stand a lower court ruling dismissing the case against CNN, which is owned by Warner Bros. Discovery. In his appeal, the retired Harvard Law School professor had asked the court to reconsider defamation protections for news organizations established in the 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan decision.

Under Sullivan and later rulings, public figures must prove “actual malice” to win libel cases, meaning a statement was made with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for whether it was false.

Dershowitz argued in his petition that Sullivan has become “an impregnable fortress that protects media irresponsibility while denying public figures any remedy for egregious misrepresentations.”

Dershowitz was part of Trump’s defense team during the 2020 Senate trial, after the House of Representatives impeached Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The case centered on Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine to announce an investigation of Democratic rival Joe Biden, who later defeated Trump in the 2020 election. The Senate acquitted Trump in that trial and again in a second impeachment trial in 2021.

Dershowitz sued over CNN’s coverage of his Senate presentation on presidential power. CNN reported that he said, “if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in an impeachment.”

In his lawsuit, Dershowitz said CNN repeatedly aired that excerpt and omitted the full context to make it appear he was “a constitutional scholar and intellectual who had lost his mind.” CNN said it aired his full remarks and interviewed him twice on air after he objected to the coverage.

A federal judge in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, ruled for CNN in 2023. The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision in 2025, finding that Dershowitz had shown no evidence that CNN’s reporters or commentators acted with actual malice.

A JetBlue flight reported a possible drone strike while approaching John F. Kennedy International Airport for landing Monday morning, according to federal officials.

The incident involved JetBlue Flight 948, which departed Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

“The pilot of JetBlue Airlines Flight 948 reported striking a drone at approximately 3,000 feet altitude while on final approach to John F. Kennedy International Airport around 7:15 a.m. local time on Monday,” the FAA said.

JetBlue said the crew “reported a possible drone encounter during the aircraft’s final approach into New York.”

The flight landed without incident, passengers deplaned normally, and the aircraft was removed from service for a post-flight inspection, JetBlue said.

JetBlue and FAA officials said the inspection found no damage to the aircraft and no evidence of a collision.

“Safety is JetBlue’s first priority, and we will assist with any relevant investigations,” JetBlue said.

The agency said unauthorized drone operations near airports are illegal, and reports of unmanned aircraft sightings from pilots, residents, and law enforcement remain high. Operators who violate FAA regulations may face civil penalties and criminal charges, including possible jail time.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to hear President Donald Trump’s appeal of a $5 million verdict awarded to E. Jean Carroll, leaving in place a jury’s 2023 finding that he sexually abused the former magazine columnist and defamed her.

The justices acted after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan upheld the verdict in 2024 and rejected Trump’s claim that the trial was unfair because jurors heard evidence about alleged past sexual misconduct.

Carroll, a former advice columnist for Elle magazine, accused Trump in a 2019 memoir excerpt of raping her in 1996 in a department store dressing room in Manhattan.

The $5 million case centered on Trump’s 2022 statements calling Carroll’s claim a “hoax” and a “con job” in a social media post. “This woman is not my type!” Trump added.

Jurors in federal court in Manhattan found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll and for defaming her.

Trump’s lawyers argued that the verdict rested on “highly inflammatory” evidentiary rulings, including testimony from two other women who accused Trump of sexual abuse decades ago. They told the Supreme Court that the trial judge “erroneously allowed testimony about multiple decades-old, unverified and unrelated allegations to be presented to the jury,” in violation of federal evidence rules.

Carroll’s lawyers urged the court not to take the case, arguing that the other women’s testimony was relevant because the allegations were similar and that Judge Lewis Kaplan’s rulings were consistent with those of other judges.

The appeals court said the evidence showed a “repeated, idiosyncratic pattern of conduct” consistent with Carroll’s allegations.

Trump responded on social media on Monday: “I will continue to fight against this Weaponization and Lawfare Case against me, including the ridiculous claim of Defamation, with all my power and strength. This Case is really against the United States of America, and all it stands for, and should never be allowed to happen to another President, or Candidate to be!”

In a second defamation trial, a jury awarded Carroll an additional $83.3 million after Trump first denied her claims in 2019. Trump is appealing that ruling, which is not yet before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court expanded presidential authority over independent federal agencies, ruling that President Donald Trump could fire agency heads despite federal laws requiring cause, while allowing Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook to remain in her job for now.

The justices ruled in the case of former Federal Trade Commission member Rebecca Slaughter, whom Trump fired without cause. The reasoning extends to other agencies where Trump also has removed board members, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Trump praised the decision on Truth Social, writing: “It is such an Honor to be the sitting President who won this Historic and Unprecedented Ruling, one of the most important ever given with respect to Presidential Powers.” He added: “To show the importance of the Slaughter Case, 90 years of precedent has been COMPLETELY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY OVERRULED, greatly increasing Presidential Power at a time when it is most needed!”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, reading from her dissent in court, said the ruling could lead to “submission, instability, and even oppression.” She added: “The president, to be sure, emerges with more power than ever before. That power was given to him by six justices on this court, not the people or the Constitution.”

In Cook’s case, the court voted 5-4 against the Trump administration’s request to remove her immediately. Roberts, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and the court’s three liberal justices formed the majority. Roberts wrote that removing Cook now “would allow the President to remove a member of the Federal Reserve at any time, for any reason, without any notice before, and without any judicial check after. That would turn for-cause protection into little more than at-will employment.”

Roberts added that nothing prevents Trump from “trying again” to fire Cook if she receives proper notice and a chance to contest it. Trump said on Truth Social that “we will take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions concerning the Welfare of the United States of America!”

Cook, who denied Trump’s allegations of mortgage fraud, will remain on the seven-member Federal Reserve Board while her lawsuit proceeds. The administration is appealing a lower-court ruling in her favor.

Three firefighters died and two were injured while responding to fires on the Colorado-Utah border, the U.S. Wildland Fire Service said Sunday.

The agency, which was created earlier this year to coordinate firefighting and fire reduction across public lands, said the firefighters were part of an interagency response to the Knowles and Gore fires on Saturday.

“The U. S. Wildland Fire Service stands united with the USDA Forest Service in grief and in our unwavering support for the loved ones left behind. Their bravery, dedication, and sacrifice will never be forgotten,” the agency said in a Facebook statement.

The largest blaze, the Cottonwood Fire in southwest Utah, grew Saturday to more than 144 square miles (373 square kilometers) in rugged terrain. It damaged part of a ski resort and summer cabins, but authorities in Beaver County said they were still assessing the extent of the damage.

Gov. Spencer Cox said in a social media post that the situation was bleak, while thanking crews for what he called “several miraculous stops and saves.”

Alyssa Mason, a spokesperson assigned to the fire, said cliffs and steep slopes had slowed the response.

Forecasters said low humidity, warm temperatures, and gusty winds created critical fire weather. Officials said conditions were worsened by Utah’s record-low snowpack and warmest winter on record.

Across the country, nearly 3 million acres (1.2 million hectares) had burned since the start of the year, more than the 10-year average, according to the National Interagency Fire Center.

In Arizona, officials said a wildfire south of Grand Canyon National Park was moving away from Grand Canyon Village and Tusayan, but another fire near Kendrick Mountain prompted evacuation orders. Utilities also shut off power in parts of northern Arizona and in Utah’s Beaver County to reduce wildfire risk.

Investigators in Humboldt County, California, said Friday they found the bodies of 117 dogs, 21 dog skulls, and hundreds of bones at Miranda’s Rescue Animal Sanctuary in Fortuna after several days of digging on the property.

The Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office said many of the 70 dogs X-rayed at the scene showed evidence of bullet fragments. Inside a barn, investigators found an area where dogs were most likely killed, authorities said, along with 600 dog collars.

The findings came as authorities investigated animal cruelty and fraud allegations tied to the reported disappearance of about 730 animals placed at the self-described no-kill sanctuary since January 2025, according to the sheriff’s office.

In a field on the property, investigators found “additional deceased canines in advanced stages of decomposition” that they did not remove because of their condition. “Investigators documented the location and observations, and the site was covered, leaving the animals in their final resting place,” the sheriff’s office said.

“This investigation is just getting started,” Sheriff William Honsal said in a statement. “There is a tremendous amount of data to process, witnesses to interview and evidence to examine.”

The sheriff’s office said the investigation would most likely take “a significant amount of time” because of its “nature and complexity.”

In a statement posted on the sanctuary’s website June 18, Shannon Miranda, the shelter’s founder, said two incidents drew attention to his business and involved euthanizing dogs with behavioral problems that had endangered staff, volunteers, and other animals. He urged the public to wait for all the facts before judging him.

“Allegations made without a full understanding of the circumstances can harm not only my reputation but also the future of an organization that has served this community for decades,” he wrote.

Authorities said Miranda asked for surrender fees ranging from $500 to several thousand dollars.

Stress across the San Andreas Fault system has reached its highest level in 1,000 years, according to new research from the University of Hawaii.

The study examined a geologic record of earthquake activity over the past millennium to assess stress on the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault systems. Using a physics-based computer model, researchers found that stress that would normally be released in large earthquakes has continued to accumulate.

Lead author Liliane Burkhard said the findings suggest the region could be capable of a rupture involving both fault systems. “Our results show that stress levels on multiple fault segments are now at or above the highest values seen in the past millennium and that the region may be capable of a large through-going rupture involving both fault systems,” said Burkhard, a research affiliate at the University of Hawaii at Manoa and a scientist at the University of Bern in Switzerland.

The study focused in part on Cajon Pass, between the San Bernardino and San Gabriel mountains in Southern California. Burkhard said it may act as an “earthquake gate,” sometimes blocking ruptures from crossing between faults and sometimes allowing them to spread through both systems in a single event.

Researchers said joint ruptures appear more likely when stress levels on both faults are similar. The University of Hawaii said such an event could affect densely populated areas including Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside and the Coachella Valley.

Washington, D.C., police agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by a resident who was handcuffed and detained after following National Guard troops while playing “The Imperial March” from “Star Wars,” according to the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia.

Sam O’Hara’s TikTok account, @freedc20009, featured videos of him walking behind or standing near Guard troops in Washington while playing the Darth Vader theme on his phone or a small Bluetooth speaker. The videos mostly showed troops ignoring him. In at least two clips, one Guard member appeared to smile and another appeared to move his head to the music.

According to the complaint, O’Hara was detained by Metropolitan Police Department officers last September after a National Guard member complained about the music. The complaint said officers tightly handcuffed O’Hara for 15 to 20 minutes, despite his objections that he was engaged in peaceful protest protected by the First Amendment.

The complaint also alleged that O’Hara told officers the handcuffs were too tight, that one officer jerked his arms while handcuffing him, and that the officers did not reduce his discomfort despite two shoulder surgeries in 2023. He was released without charges.

O’Hara’s attorneys said he played the music “at a volume that was audible but not blaring,” did not speak to or touch Guard members, did not interfere with operations, and followed them only briefly during walking patrols.

The ACLU said settlement terms were confidential, but that Washington, D.C., agreed to pay to resolve the claims against the police department. Litigation against the National Guard member involved remained ongoing.

John Bolton, who served as President Donald Trump’s national security adviser during Trump’s first term, pleaded guilty Friday to a federal charge of mishandling classified information, the Department of Justice said.

The plea resolved an 18-count indictment against Bolton, who lives in Bethesda, Maryland. He agreed to pay a $2.25 million penalty, the Justice Department said.

According to the indictment, Bolton recorded “highly sensitive classified information” from his official duties in a personal diary while serving as national security adviser from April 2018 to September 2019. The indictment said he shared diary entries with two family members who were not authorized to access the information, which included top-secret material.

“John Bolton held a position of extraordinary public trust as the country’s top National Security Advisor, and he betrayed that trust, jeopardizing our nation’s security,” Hayden O’Byrne, the acting deputy assistant attorney general for the National Security Division, said in a statement. “Today’s resolution ought to send a message to other public officials whom the public has entrusted with classified, national defense information.”

Bolton’s attorney, Abbe David Lowell, said Bolton’s plea accepted responsibility for a mistake, which was “what real leaders do,” and contrasted Bolton’s conduct with Trump’s handling of classified information in a separate case brought in 2023.

“By contrast, President Trump thumbed his nose at the classified information laws, took actual classified documents to his Florida mansion, interfered with the investigation of that conduct, and has never accepted any accountability for his conduct,” Lowell wrote. “Ambassador Bolton, whose offense was only keeping a diary which contained classified information, kept a record to preserve history, but Donald Trump kept secrets to serve himself.”