Donald Trump
US Supreme Court Is Set To Rule On Cases That Will Define The Limits Of Presidential Power
The nine justices who sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, are set to issue several consequential rulings this week starting on Monday before they go on a nearly two-month summer recess. Their decisions will shape the future of Donald Trump’s presidency, redraw the boundaries of separation of powers between the executive and the legislative, set a new limit on presidential authority and determine the very nature of the nation.
Birthright citizenship
In recent years the justices have left some of their most consequential cases for the final week of June. This year is no different. The court is expected to rule on Trump v. Barbara, involving the president’s attempt to roll back birthright citizenship, which grants U.S. nationality virtually automatically to anyone born on U.S. soil.
The case was heard on April 1, when a majority of the justices expressed skepticism about Trump’s order to deny citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants. The court’s decision could affect more than 250,000 babies a year—or nearly 3 million children over the next decade—who could be deprived of U.S. citizenship.
It is one of the most politically charged cases on the docket. In an unprecedented move, Trump showed up in the courtroom to hear the oral arguments in April. No sitting president had ever attended an oral argument before—it was without precedent in U.S. democratic history. Trump’s presence was widely seen as an effort to pressure and influence the justices’ independence, weeks after they had rebuked him by striking down his reciprocal tariffs on the world.
Although the conservative court is often aligned with Trump’s policies, the justices have expressed some skepticism in the birthright case. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a line likely to shape the opinion: “It’s a new world, but the same Constitution.”
The Fed’s independence
Another controversial case before the nine justices concerns Trump’s attempt to remove Lisa Cook, one of the governors on the Federal Reserve Board whom he has accused—without evidence—of mortgage fraud. The court faces a fraught choice: the Fed is an autonomous, independent agency accountable only to Congress. It was designed that way to prevent government interference in monetary policy. History shows presidents typically pressure the institution to lower interest rates during election seasons. But federal law allows the president to remove a Fed official “for just cause.”
The president posted the termination letter on social media—an unsigned, letterhead-free document alleging irregularities the official strongly denies. About 500 prominent economists signed letters backing Cook, the first Black woman to serve on the Fed’s board. She was appointed by Joe Biden in 2022 and is one of the policy hawks opposed to the broad rate cuts that Trump seeks. At oral argument in January, a majority of the justices seemed reluctant to allow Cook’s removal.
Trump’s maneuver is interpreted as a strategy to undermine the Fed’s independence and would blur the thin line separating executive and legislative power.
The firing of Rebecca Slaughter
The justices must decide whether the occupant of the White House can remove Rebecca Slaughter, one of five members of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), without sufficient cause. At oral argument the justices appeared inclined to side with the president and allow Slaughter’s dismissal.
The rules governing the FTC prevent the president from removing commissioners except for “inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.” None of those grounds were mentioned in the letter Slaughter received. Instead, the letter said her remaining in office was “incompatible with the Administration’s priorities.” During the oral argument, when the court seemed poised to rule for Trump, judges debated whether a ruling for Slaughter would grant Congress disproportionate power.
Voting by mail
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on two other major decisions that will affect the upcoming midterm elections in November, which will serve as a kind of referendum on Trump’s tenure. In Watson v. Republican National Committee, the justices must review a challenge to a Mississippi law that allows ballots mailed by Election Day to be counted if they are postmarked and received within five days after Election Day. At oral argument, a majority of the justices appeared willing to uphold a lower court’s view that federal law requires all ballots to be received by Election Day.
During argument, most justices sided with Mississippi Republicans and the state Libertarian Party, who brought the challenge. A majority of the justices agreed the state law appears to conflict with federal statutes that designate the Tuesday after the first Monday in November as Election Day and therefore do not permit ballots to be received afterward.
A conservative majority court
Although the justices can rule against the president in some of these cases, the court has repeatedly shown alignment with the Trump administration, which appointed three current justices. Last Thursday, for example, it issued a ruling that allows the president to terminate Temporary Protected Status for 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians, potentially paving the way for their deportation. The decision could affect nearly 1 million people from other countries who rely on the program to avoid removal from the United States. That same day the conservative majority upheld a Trump-backed federal rule that bars asylum applications at the U.S.–Mexico border. The order allows migrants reaching the border to be expelled without an opportunity to present their claims to officials.
The rulings endorse the tightening of immigration laws by the Trump administration, which has made combating immigration a central plank of its policies. The government has expanded the resources of ICE and the Border Patrol with aggressive campaigns of harassment against undocumented immigrants in order to carry out mass deportations. These policies represent a dramatic shift toward nationalism in a country whose founding DNA is rooted in successive waves of immigrants from around the world: the United States was built on waves of newcomers from every corner of the globe.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition
Trump’s commemorative passport marks the 250th anniversary of American independence.
Credit : X – The White House
@WhiteHouse
For generations, American passports have carried the symbols of the United States rather than the face of the president occupying the White House. Donald Trump has now broken with that tradition.
On Friday, June 26, the US president shared the design of a limited edition passport created for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The commemorative document features Trump’s own portrait, making him the first sitting American president to appear on a US passport while still in office.
The image appeared on Trump’s Truth Social account alongside a short message: ‘The new United States Passport that says ‘Welcome, but behave yourself!’
The announcement was brief, but it immediately prompted questions about the passport itself, why it carries the president’s image and whether it represents another step in Trump’s effort to leave a visible mark on America’s national symbols.
The passport was supposed to celebrate America’s birthday. Instead, everyone is talking about the photo
The design is unmistakably patriotic.
Trump is pictured sitting behind the Resolute Desk, with the text of the Declaration of Independence forming the background. His signature appears beneath the portrait, which closely resembles an official White House photograph taken by presidential photographer Daniel Torok.
Turn the page and the theme continues. An illustration of the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 sits above the words ‘United States of America 250,’ a reference to the country’s semiquincentennial celebrations next year.
The White House later reposted the design, calling it the ‘Patriot Passport.’
What has not been explained is how the passport will actually be used. At the time of writing, the State Department had not provided details on whether it will be issued to travellers, produced in limited numbers or simply form part of the broader America250 commemorations.
That uncertainty has only added to the interest surrounding it.
Why this small design choice has become such a big story
Presidents regularly appear on campaign posters, commemorative coins and official portraits.
Passports are different. They are government documents carried by millions of citizens and are generally designed to stay politically neutral. That is why historians point out that no serving US president has previously appeared on an American passport.
That fact alone explains why the images spread so quickly.
Supporters see the design as a patriotic keepsake produced for one of the biggest anniversaries in American history.
Critics see something else.
Some argue that official state documents should celebrate the country rather than the politician temporarily leading it. Others say the passport fits a wider pattern in which Trump has attached his name or image to high profile government projects.
The debate has grown because this is not the only example. Reports have also indicated that future US banknotes will carry Donald Trump’s signature, something that would also be unprecedented for a serving president.
Taken together, the moves have revived accusations from political opponents that Trump is increasingly placing his personal stamp on national institutions.
His supporters reject that criticism, saying there is nothing unusual about a president taking a leading role in celebrating the country’s 250th anniversary.
The biggest mystery isn’t the portrait. It’s who will actually get one
For all the attention the passport has received, one basic question remains unanswered.
Can ordinary Americans apply for one?
At the moment, nobody outside the administration knows.
Neither the White House nor the State Department has explained how many will be produced, who will receive them or whether they will function like an ordinary passport.
That means the document has become famous before anyone has even seen one in person.
Perhaps that is fitting. Passports are normally discussed because of visa rules, border controls or new security features. This one has entered the headlines for an entirely different reason.
Long before it reaches anyone’s pocket, it has already become part of America’s political conversation.
Donald Trump
Republican Sheriffs In Maryland Rebel Against Ban On Cooperating With ICE: ‘It Does A Lot Of Damage To Public Safety’
Ride a motorbike in Spain? These three everyday habits could soon set you back €200
This stunning Mallorca castle is hosting concerts all summer
Big boost for commuters as Valencia extends travel discounts
Dinosaurs are roaring over to Estepona this summer in a massive 5,000m² exhibition
Families Caring For Elderly Parents In Spain Say Brexit Has Left Them With Impossible Choices
Denia launches new La Marineta music festival this summer with Fangoria and Nil Moliner
-
Costa del Sol1 week ago
Dinosaurs are roaring over to Estepona this summer in a massive 5,000m² exhibition
-
%1 week agoFamilies Caring For Elderly Parents In Spain Say Brexit Has Left Them With Impossible Choices
-
Costa Blanca North1 week ago
Denia launches new La Marineta music festival this summer with Fangoria and Nil Moliner
-
%2 weeks agoOne Of Spain’s Top Supermarkets Has Just Been Ranked Among Europe’s Most Innovative In A Major New Report
-
Finland1 week ago
Finns abroad keep Juhannus traditions alive on Spanish coast in 2026
-
Latest2 weeks ago
KEY POINTS: What Changes About Life In Spain In July 2026
-
ElPais2 weeks agoPrimary Elections In New York, Maryland, And Utah: Date And How To Vote
-
Barcelona1 week agoWATCH: Chaos In Barcelona As Knife-Wielding Man Chases Pedestrians Through Upmarket Barrio