Maureen Groppe

Good morning. It's Thursday, May 15th. I'm Shamita Basu. This is Apple News Today. On today's show, the Republicans raising concerns about Trump's Qatari jet gift. In manufacturing towns, support for tariffs is a mixed bag. And why women feel the effects of alcohol more than men.

Good morning. It's Thursday, May 15th. I'm Shamita Basu. This is Apple News Today. On today's show, the Republicans raising concerns about Trump's Qatari jet gift. In manufacturing towns, support for tariffs is a mixed bag. And why women feel the effects of alcohol more than men.

Good morning. It's Thursday, May 15th. I'm Shamita Basu. This is Apple News Today. On today's show, the Republicans raising concerns about Trump's Qatari jet gift. In manufacturing towns, support for tariffs is a mixed bag. And why women feel the effects of alcohol more than men.

But first, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in a case that stems from President Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship, the constitutional right that guarantees automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S., regardless of their parents' citizenship or immigration status. Trump, in his first day in office, signed an executive order seeking to end this right.

But first, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in a case that stems from President Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship, the constitutional right that guarantees automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S., regardless of their parents' citizenship or immigration status. Trump, in his first day in office, signed an executive order seeking to end this right.

But first, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in a case that stems from President Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship, the constitutional right that guarantees automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S., regardless of their parents' citizenship or immigration status. Trump, in his first day in office, signed an executive order seeking to end this right.

Attorneys general from 22 states, advocacy groups, and a number of individual immigrant plaintiffs have since challenged his order. And federal judges in three states have issued injunctions to block it from being enforced nationwide. One judge called it blatantly unconstitutional. But that's not actually what the Supreme Court is looking at.

Attorneys general from 22 states, advocacy groups, and a number of individual immigrant plaintiffs have since challenged his order. And federal judges in three states have issued injunctions to block it from being enforced nationwide. One judge called it blatantly unconstitutional. But that's not actually what the Supreme Court is looking at.

Attorneys general from 22 states, advocacy groups, and a number of individual immigrant plaintiffs have since challenged his order. And federal judges in three states have issued injunctions to block it from being enforced nationwide. One judge called it blatantly unconstitutional. But that's not actually what the Supreme Court is looking at.

The Trump administration did not ask the Supreme Court to decide whether Trump's executive order is constitutional.

The Trump administration did not ask the Supreme Court to decide whether Trump's executive order is constitutional.

The Trump administration did not ask the Supreme Court to decide whether Trump's executive order is constitutional.

Maureen Groppi is the Supreme Court correspondent for USA Today.

Maureen Groppi is the Supreme Court correspondent for USA Today.

Maureen Groppi is the Supreme Court correspondent for USA Today.

It asks the Supreme Court to narrow the holds that judges around the country have put on the policy. These judges have said this policy can't be implemented while the constitutionality of the policy is being litigated. And the Trump administration filed an emergency request to the Supreme Court saying that the judges shouldn't be allowed to do that.

It asks the Supreme Court to narrow the holds that judges around the country have put on the policy. These judges have said this policy can't be implemented while the constitutionality of the policy is being litigated. And the Trump administration filed an emergency request to the Supreme Court saying that the judges shouldn't be allowed to do that.

It asks the Supreme Court to narrow the holds that judges around the country have put on the policy. These judges have said this policy can't be implemented while the constitutionality of the policy is being litigated. And the Trump administration filed an emergency request to the Supreme Court saying that the judges shouldn't be allowed to do that.

So, in other words, the legal questions in this case are really about the scope of executive power and to what degree lower courts are allowed to restrict a president from pursuing this type of action. The administration is arguing the courts have overreached and that they're illegally limiting the power of the president. Those challenging the order have said their actions are warranted.

So, in other words, the legal questions in this case are really about the scope of executive power and to what degree lower courts are allowed to restrict a president from pursuing this type of action. The administration is arguing the courts have overreached and that they're illegally limiting the power of the president. Those challenging the order have said their actions are warranted.