Shumita Basu

Good morning. It's Friday, May 16th. I'm Shamita Basu. This is Apple News Today. On today's show, what's in the GOP's big tax bill, the EPA's regulatory rollback on forever chemicals in drinking water, and the world's first patient treated with personalized gene editing therapy. But first, the Supreme Court seems torn over what to do with the birthright citizenship case.

Good morning. It's Friday, May 16th. I'm Shamita Basu. This is Apple News Today. On today's show, what's in the GOP's big tax bill, the EPA's regulatory rollback on forever chemicals in drinking water, and the world's first patient treated with personalized gene editing therapy. But first, the Supreme Court seems torn over what to do with the birthright citizenship case.

Good morning. It's Friday, May 16th. I'm Shamita Basu. This is Apple News Today. On today's show, what's in the GOP's big tax bill, the EPA's regulatory rollback on forever chemicals in drinking water, and the world's first patient treated with personalized gene editing therapy. But first, the Supreme Court seems torn over what to do with the birthright citizenship case.

As we mentioned yesterday, the constitutionality of Trump's order calling to end birthright citizenship is not what the court is being asked to consider. Rather, justices yesterday were asked to weigh the limits of judicial power. and whether a lower court is allowed to block an executive order like this one from being enforced nationwide.

As we mentioned yesterday, the constitutionality of Trump's order calling to end birthright citizenship is not what the court is being asked to consider. Rather, justices yesterday were asked to weigh the limits of judicial power. and whether a lower court is allowed to block an executive order like this one from being enforced nationwide.

As we mentioned yesterday, the constitutionality of Trump's order calling to end birthright citizenship is not what the court is being asked to consider. Rather, justices yesterday were asked to weigh the limits of judicial power. and whether a lower court is allowed to block an executive order like this one from being enforced nationwide.

The Trump administration has asked the court to scale back the nationwide injunctions against his order so they can apply to only those who are pregnant, immigrant advocacy groups, and residents of the 22 states that challenged his order in the courts. Here's Solicitor General D. John Sauer arguing on behalf of the administration.

The Trump administration has asked the court to scale back the nationwide injunctions against his order so they can apply to only those who are pregnant, immigrant advocacy groups, and residents of the 22 states that challenged his order in the courts. Here's Solicitor General D. John Sauer arguing on behalf of the administration.

The Trump administration has asked the court to scale back the nationwide injunctions against his order so they can apply to only those who are pregnant, immigrant advocacy groups, and residents of the 22 states that challenged his order in the courts. Here's Solicitor General D. John Sauer arguing on behalf of the administration.

For more than a century, most scholars and courts have agreed that the 14th Amendment is not exclusively about slavery and that it plainly states intent that every child born within the territory of the United States is a citizen. The defendants, meanwhile, argued that restricting the scope of injunctions would go against the Constitution and previous court rulings.

For more than a century, most scholars and courts have agreed that the 14th Amendment is not exclusively about slavery and that it plainly states intent that every child born within the territory of the United States is a citizen. The defendants, meanwhile, argued that restricting the scope of injunctions would go against the Constitution and previous court rulings.

For more than a century, most scholars and courts have agreed that the 14th Amendment is not exclusively about slavery and that it plainly states intent that every child born within the territory of the United States is a citizen. The defendants, meanwhile, argued that restricting the scope of injunctions would go against the Constitution and previous court rulings.

New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum said the Trump administration's request to let the injunction stand in some places, but not others for now, would lead to chaos.

New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum said the Trump administration's request to let the injunction stand in some places, but not others for now, would lead to chaos.

New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum said the Trump administration's request to let the injunction stand in some places, but not others for now, would lead to chaos.

This isn't the first time justices have been asked to weigh in on nationwide injunctions, and justices have expressed dismay in the past. Yesterday, Justice Clarence Thomas seemed to focus on the history of nationwide injunctions, suggesting at one point the United States had, quote, survived until the 1960s without using them.

This isn't the first time justices have been asked to weigh in on nationwide injunctions, and justices have expressed dismay in the past. Yesterday, Justice Clarence Thomas seemed to focus on the history of nationwide injunctions, suggesting at one point the United States had, quote, survived until the 1960s without using them.

This isn't the first time justices have been asked to weigh in on nationwide injunctions, and justices have expressed dismay in the past. Yesterday, Justice Clarence Thomas seemed to focus on the history of nationwide injunctions, suggesting at one point the United States had, quote, survived until the 1960s without using them.

From the liberal wing, Justice Elena Kagan acknowledged that critics of both the Biden and Trump administrations had used friendly jurisdictions to their advantage. But she asked Sauer how else states could tackle executive orders they perceived to be blatantly unconstitutional.

From the liberal wing, Justice Elena Kagan acknowledged that critics of both the Biden and Trump administrations had used friendly jurisdictions to their advantage. But she asked Sauer how else states could tackle executive orders they perceived to be blatantly unconstitutional.