Maureen Grappi

If they do that, if they say his law violates the law, then Congress could change the law.

But that would likely lead to another legal battle that would come back to the Supreme Court and they would have to decide finally the constitutional question underlying this issue.

The court could, of course, uphold Trump's executive order and say that he's right on how he interprets the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment.

But if they rule against him, they can do that in more than one way.

They can say that his order, his understanding of the 14th Amendment is wrong, or they could say his executive order violates a 1952 law and therefore it's not legal.

That would be up to the court.

The original order was supposed to go into effect 30 days after Trump signed it, but the court could set a new effective date.

So, for example, last year when they looked at the issue of whether Trump's executive order could go into effect while it was being litigated, when they issued a decision saying the lower court judges had gone too far in putting

the order on hold and they had the judges take another look at it, they kept that from going into effect for 30 days to give courts time to adjust.

And in fact, within those 30 days, the lower court judges looked at it again and found a different way of putting his order on hold.

So it has not gone into effect.

But the point is that it's Supreme Court rules in Trump's favor.

They can also say when they think it should go into effect, how much time is needed for everyone to adjust.

We would expect a ruling by the end of June or early July.

The court often hands down its biggest decisions at the end of their term, which ends at the end of June or early July.

And this, as you mentioned, is one of their biggest, if not their biggest cases this term.

And it's also being argued a little later in the term.

And so that means the justices will need time.

They could work up right up to that deadline to come up with their opinion.