defend

WASHINGTON  — Inside the Supreme Court, as justices heard oral arguments in the case over birthright citizenship, President Trump became the first sitting president to attend such a proceeding.

Outside the court, the great-grandson of Wong Kim Ark — the San Francisco man whose landmark Supreme Court case affirmed birthright citizenship in 1898 — addressed a crowd of hundreds of people.

“Wong Kim Ark’s victory ensured that people like me and millions of others would be recognized as fully American, not outsiders in the country of our birth,” said Norman Wong. “This case transformed the 14th Amendment from words on paper into living promise. Today, that promise is still being tested.”

Surrounded by protesters in favor of birthright citizenship was a lone counter-protester. The woman, who wore a red baseball cap and a sweatshirt stating “Chicago flips red,” yelled into a megaphone as speakers addressed the crowd.

“Freedmen stand with Donald Trump,” she said as the Rev. William Barber II spoke. “America first. Americans first.”

The Rev. William Barber II speaks during a rally on protecting birthright citizenship outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

(Al Drago / Getty Images)

Undaunted, Barber noted that the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, makes clear that anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen.

“The 14th Amendment protects babies from a caste system,” Barber said. “They didn’t allow evil in 1868, and we’re not going to allow evil in 2026.”

“Stop lying, pastor,” the woman taunted him.

After Barber finished his remarks, the woman was drowned out by Aretha Franklin’s “Respect” playing over the speakers.

Inside the building, justices heard arguments over a Trump executive order which aimed to end birthright citizenship. The administration has argued that children born of parents who are in the country illegally or temporary visas should be denied citizenship.

A man from Cameroon said he chose to speak out because he doesn’t want future generations to become stateless and feel what he has felt. The man said he had been authorized to work in the United States Temporary Protected Status until the Trump administration terminated it last year.

“I know what it feels like to have your sense of belonging taken from you overnight,” he said.

Nancy Jeannechild, 69, traveled from Baltimore with a handwritten sign asking the justices to “Do your job.” She said Trump has amassed too much power and that the Supreme Court hasn’t stood up to him enough.

“This is another opportunity for them to do the right thing, and I hope that they will,” she said. “Just because Trump doesn’t like it doesn’t mean it’s not what’s in the Constitution.”

Araceli Hernandez, 29, attended the rally with her 1-year-old son. She said she immigrated from Honduras five years ago and that her son being born here means he has better opportunities to study, access to healthcare and a safe environment to live in.

“We came to represent the children who are not yet born because they also have a right to have a better future in this country,” she said.

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said he was confident birthright citizenship would prevail because the Constitution is clear. The fight is personal, he said, as the a proud American and son of immigrants.

“The moment I was born on U.S. soil I was born a citizen, and I’ll be damned if Donald Trump tries to take that away from me,” he said. “What’s on the line isn’t just a question about citizenship — it is about upholding the Constitution, respecting the rule of law and keeping the promise that the 14th Amendment has held for more than 150 years.”

After the arguments wrapped up, Cecilia Wang, who led the defense of birthright citizenship for the American Civil Liberties Union, addressed the crowd. She said she was confident that the Trump administration would lose the case.

“Whether you’re an indigenous American, whether you are descended from African Americans who were enslaved and free, whether you are the descendant of someone who came on the Mayflower or someone who arrived just before your birth, we all are Americans alike,” she said. “That is the principle that we stood up for together, all of us, in the Supreme Court of the United States today.”

US president’s reference to Japan’s 1941 attack on naval base in Hawaii has shaken the Japanese public as PM Takaichi’s silence gets mixed reaction.

There has been embarrassment, confusion, and unease in Japan after US President Donald Trump used the Pearl Harbor attack during World War II to justify his secrecy before launching the war on Iran.

Trump was asked by a reporter why he did not tell allies in Europe and Asia in advance of the US-Israel attack on Iran during a news conference with Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi at the White House on Friday.

Trump cited Pearl Harbor to defend his decision saying, “Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Why didn’t you tell me about Pearl Harbor, OK?”

Following the remarks, social media reaction has ranged from accusations of ignorance and rudeness by the US president to claims that he does not see Japan as an equal partner. There were calls for Japan to protest Trump’s comments.

Tsuneo Watanabe, a senior fellow at the Sasakawa Peace Foundation, said in an opinion piece in the Nikkei newspaper on Saturday that the remarks signalled Trump is “not bound by existing American common sense”.

“I get the impression that the comment was intended to bring the Japanese reporter [who asked the question] or Ms Takaichi into complicity in order to justify his ‘sneak attack’ on Iran during diplomatic negotiations and without telling allied countries,” Watanabe wrote.

There is also a feeling that an unspoken understanding exists between United States and Japanese leaders to tread carefully on the subject.

Both sides need each other, with Washington relying on Japan to host 50,000 troops and an array of powerful hi-tech weapons, and Japan relying on the US nuclear umbrella to deter hostile, nuclear-armed neighbours.

Japan’s post-World War II constitution bans the use of force except for its self-defence, but Takaichi and other officials are now seeking to expand the military’s role.

Mixed reaction to Takaichi’s response

Takaichi, a hardline conservative, was praised by some for not reacting to Trump’s comments, letting them pass with a roll of her eyes and a glance at her ministers seated nearby.

The goal of her summit was to deepen ties with her most important ally, and she arrived shortly after Trump suggested Japan was among the nations that did not quickly join his call to help protect the Strait of Hormuz.

Some, however, criticised Takaichi for not speaking up.

Hitoshi Tanaka, a former diplomat and a special adviser at the Japan Research Institute think tank, wrote on X that he felt embarrassed to see Takaichi flattering Trump.

“As national leaders, they are equals … To make an equal relationship is not to flatter,” he said. “Just doing what pleases Trump and calling it a success if you are not hurt is too sad.”

Initially, social media placed some of the blame on the Japanese reporter who asked the question that prompted Trump’s Pearl Harbor comment.

The reporter, Morio Chijiiwa with TV Asahi, later said on a talk show he asked the question to represent the feelings of Japanese who are not happy about Trump’s one-sided attack on Iran, and because other countries, including Japan, are now being asked to help out after the US and Israel started the war.

“So that’s why I asked the question. I was meaning to say, ‘Why didn’t you tell us, why are you troubling us?’” he said.

“Then President Trump hit back with the Pearl Harbor attack … I found it extremely awkward for him to change the subject.”

Fabian Edwards’ wait for a world title goes on after he loses against Costello van Steenis, who successfully defends his PFL middleweight title with a third-round knockout in Madrid.

READ MORE: Van Steenis ends Edwards’ title dream again

Available to UK users only.

For two overs, it appeared things could have been just like 2023 when India were far too tentative on, quite literally, cricket’s biggest stage.

There were five dot balls in the first over, bowled by seamer Matt Henry, and only five runs in the second, off Glenn Phillips’ part-time spin.

But Samson and Abhishek took 15 from Jacob Duffy’s first over and 24 from the next bowled by Lockie Ferguson as the innings, and the crowd, roared into life.

Even with that slow start, Abhishek and Samson took 92 runs from the best powerplay ever seen at a World Cup. In comparison, the Black Caps were 52-3 after their first six overs – a crucial difference.

Abhishek had only made one score over 15 in this tournament but flogged the ball to all parts. Samson was again supreme, backing up his 97 not out against West Indies and 89 against England with another innings that mixed flair with a classical technique.

Together he and Abhishek hit 12 of the innings’ 18 sixes, which took India’s tournament total to 106 – 30 more than any other team here and a record for a T20 World Cup.

When left-hander Kishan followed in raising his bat it was the first time the top three had reached fifty in a men’s T20 World Cup. They had 203 runs after 15.1 overs and Dube’s late burst – after a run of 28 runs in 24 balls – ensured India charged beyond a par score.

They took all the momentum, a batting paradise capitalised upon. Afterwards the chase was a slow coronation.

India were beaten by South Africa in the Super 8s stage but have responded brilliantly with three scores in excess of 250. This was a night of glory for a new generation, after the T20 retirement of superstars Virat Kohli, Rohit Sharma and Ravindra Jadeja.