WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court on Friday ruled that individual judges lack the authority to grant nationwide injunctions, but the decision left unclear the fate of President Donald Trump’s restrictions on birthright citizenship.

The outcome was a victory for the Republican president, who has complained about individual judges throwing up obstacles to his agenda.

But a conservative majority left open the possibility that the birthright citizenship changes could remain blocked nationwide. Trump’s order would deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of people who are in the country illegally.

The cases now return to lower courts, where judges will have to decide how to tailor their orders to comply with the high court ruling, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the majority opinion. Enforcement of the policy can’t take place for another 30 days, Barrett wrote.

The justices agreed with the Trump administration, as well as President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration before it, that judges are overreaching by issuing orders that apply to everyone instead of just the parties before the court.

The president, making a rare appearance to hold a news conference in the White House briefing room, said that the decision was “amazing” and a “monumental victory for the Constitution,” the separation of powers and the rule of law.

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, “The court’s decision is nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the Constitution.” This is so, Sotomayor said, because the administration may be able to enforce a policy even when it has been challenged and found to be unconstitutional by a lower court.

Rights groups that sued over the policy filed new court documents following the high court ruling, taking up a suggestion from Justice Brett Kavanaugh that judges still may be able to reach anyone potentially affected by the birthright citizenship order by declaring them part of “putative nationwide class.” Kavanaugh was part of the court majority on Friday but wrote a separate concurring opinion.

States that also challenged the policy in court said they would try to show that the only way to effectively protect their interests was through a nationwide hold.

“We have every expectation we absolutely will be successful in keeping the 14th Amendment as the law of the land and of course birthright citizenship as well,” said Attorney General Andrea Campbell of Massachusetts.

Birthright citizenship automatically makes anyone born in the United States an American citizen, including children born to mothers in the country illegally. The right was enshrined soon after the Civil War in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

In a notable Supreme Court decision from 1898, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the court held that the only children who did not automatically receive U.S. citizenship upon being born on U.S. soil were the children of diplomats, who have allegiance to another government; enemies present in the U.S. during hostile occupation; those born on foreign ships; and those born to members of sovereign Native American tribes.

The U.S. is among about 30 countries where birthright citizenship — the principle of jus soli or “right of the soil” — is applied. Most are in the Americas, and Canada and Mexico are among them.

Trump and his supporters have argued that there should be tougher standards for becoming an American citizen, which he called “a priceless and profound gift” in the executive order he signed on his first day in office.

The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, a phrase used in the amendment, and therefore are not entitled to citizenship.

But states, immigrants and rights groups that have sued to block the executive order have accused the administration of trying to unsettle the broader understanding of birthright citizenship that has been accepted since the amendment’s adoption.

Judges have uniformly ruled against the administration.

The Justice Department had argued that individual judges lack the power to give nationwide effect to their rulings.

The Trump administration instead wanted the justices to allow Trump’s plan to go into effect for everyone except the handful of people and groups that sued. Failing that, the administration argued that the plan could remain blocked for now in the 22 states that sued. New Hampshire is covered by a separate order that is not at issue in this case.

The justice also agreed that the administration may make public announcements about how it plans to carry out the policy if it eventually is allowed to take effect.

–Reporting by Mark Sherman, Associated Press

TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — The United States struck three sites in Iran early Sunday, inserting itself into Israel’s war aimed at destroying the country’s nuclear program in a risky gambit to weaken a longtime foe despite fears of a wider regional conflict.

Addressing the nation from the White House, President Donald Trump asserted that Iran’s key nuclear were “completely and fully obliterated.” There was no independent damage assessment.

It was not clear whether the U.S. would continue attacking Iran alongside its ally Israel, which has been engaged in a nine-day war with Iran. Trump acted without congressional authorization, and he warned that there would be additional strikes if Tehran retaliated against U.S. forces.

“There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,” he said.

Iran’s top diplomat, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, warned in a post on X that the U.S. attacks “will have everlasting consequences” and that Tehran “reserves all options” to retaliate.

Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations called for an emergency Security Council meeting to discuss what he described as the U.S.’s “heinous attacks and illegal use of force” against Iran.

In a letter obtained by The Associated Press, Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani said that the U.N.’s most powerful body must “take all necessary measures” to hold the U.S. accountable under international law and the U.N. charter.

The U.N. nuclear watchdog said later that there has been “no increase in off-site radiation levels” at the locations that the U.S. hit. The International Atomic Energy Agency sent the message via the social platform X.

Early Sunday morning Israel alerted the public of an Iranian missile launch and urged people to take shelter. Sirens sounded in Jerusalem a short while later and a series of booms were heard.

Iranian has been firing missile barrages at Israel since the war began but they have decreased in size as Israel targets Tehran’s missile launchers. The Islamic Republic may also be keeping some arms in reserve.

The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran confirmed that attacks took place on its Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz sites, but it insisted that its work will not be stopped. Iran said there were no signs of radioactive contamination at the three locations and no danger to nearby residents.

Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Tehran is not actively pursuing a bomb. However, Trump and Israeli leaders have claimed that Iran could quickly assemble a nuclear weapon, making it an imminent threat.

The decision to directly involve the U.S. in the war comes after more than a week of strikes by Israel on Iran that aimed to systematically eradicate the country’s air defenses and offensive missile capabilities, while damaging its nuclear enrichment facilities. But U.S. and Israeli officials have said American stealth bombers and the 30,000-pound (13,500-kilogram) bunker-buster bomb they alone can carry offered the best chance of destroying heavily fortified sites connected to the Iranian nuclear program buried deep underground.

“We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan,” Trump said in a post on social media. “All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home.”

Trump added in a later post: “This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR. THANK YOU!”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump’s decision to attack in a video message directed at the American president.

“Your bold decision to target Iran’s nuclear facilities, with the awesome and righteous might of the United States, will change history,” he said. Netanyahu said the U.S. “has done what no other country on earth could do.”

Israel announced Sunday that it would close the country’s airspace to both inbound and outbound flights in the wake of the U.S. attacks. The war has disrupted air travel throughout the Middle East.

The White House and Pentagon did not immediately elaborate on the operation. U.S. military leaders are scheduled to provide a briefing at 8 a.m. Eastern.

The attack used bunker-buster bombs on Iran’s Fordo nuclear fuel enrichment plant that is built deep into a mountain, a U.S. official said. The weapons are designed to penetrate the ground before exploding. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss military operations.

In addition, U.S. submarines launched about 30 Tomahawk missiles, according to another U.S. official who also spoke on condition of anonymity.

The strikes are a perilous decision, as Iran has pledged to retaliate if the U.S. joined the Israeli assault, and for Trump personally. He won the White House on the promise of keeping America out of costly foreign conflicts and scoffed at the value of American interventionism.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was “gravely alarmed” by the “dangerous escalation” of American strikes.

“There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control — with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,” he said in a statement.

Trump told reporters Friday that he was not interested in sending ground forces into Iran, saying it’s “the last thing you want to do.” He had previously indicated that he would make a final choice over the course of two weeks.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned the United States on Wednesday that strikes targeting the Islamic Republic will “result in irreparable damage for them.” And Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei declared “any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region.”

Trump has vowed that he would not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, and he had initially hoped that the threat of force would bring the country’s leaders to give up its nuclear program peacefully.

The Israeli military said Saturday it was preparing for the possibility of a lengthy war, while Iran’s foreign minister warned before the U.S. attack that American military involvement “would be very, very dangerous for everyone.”

The prospect of a wider war loomed. Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen said they would resume attacks on U.S. vessels in the Red Sea if the Trump administration joined Israel’s military campaign. The Houthis paused such attacks in May under a deal with the U.S.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday that Trump planned to make his decision on the strikes within two weeks. Instead, he struck just two days later.

Trump appears to have made the calculation — at the prodding of Israeli officials and many Republican lawmakers — that Israel’s operation had softened the ground and presented a perhaps unparalleled opportunity to set back Iran’s nuclear program, perhaps permanently.

The Israelis say their offensive has already crippled Iran’s air defenses, allowing them to significantly degrade multiple Iranian nuclear sites.

But to destroy the Fordo nuclear fuel enrichment plant, Israel appealed to Trump for the bunker-busting American bomb known as the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, which uses its weight and sheer kinetic force to reach deeply buried targets and then explode. The bomb is currently delivered only by the B-2 stealth bomber, which is only found in the American arsenal.

It was the first combat use of the weapon.

The bomb carries a conventional warhead, and is believed to be able to penetrate about 200 feet (61 meters) below the surface before exploding, and the bombs can be dropped one after another, effectively drilling deeper and deeper with each successive blast.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed that Iran is producing highly enriched uranium at Fordo, raising the possibility that nuclear material could be released into the area if the GBU-57 A/B were used to hit the facility.

Previous Israeli strikes at another Iranian nuclear site, Natanz, on a centrifuge site have caused contamination only at the site itself, not the surrounding area, the IAEA has said.

Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 865 people and wounded 3,396 others, according to the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists. The group said of those dead, it identified 363 civilians and 215 security force personnel.

Trump’s decision for direct U.S. military intervention comes after his administration made an unsuccessful two-month push — including with high-level, direct negotiations with the Iranians — aimed at persuading Tehran to curb its nuclear program.

For months, Trump said he was dedicated to a diplomatic push to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. And he twice — in April and again in late May — persuaded Netanyahu to hold off on military action against Iran and give diplomacy more time.

All the while, Trump has gone from publicly expressing hope that the moment could be a “second chance” for Iran to make a deal to delivering explicit threats on Khamenei and making calls for Tehran’s unconditional surrender.

The military showdown with Iran comes seven years after Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-administration brokered agreement in 2018, calling it the “worst deal ever.”

The 2015 deal, signed by Iran, U.S. and other world powers, created a long-term, comprehensive nuclear agreement that limited Tehran’s enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions.

Trump decried the Obama-era deal for giving Iran too much in return for too little, because the agreement did not cover Iran’s non-nuclear malign behavior.

Trump has bristled at criticism from some of his MAGA faithful who have suggested that further U.S. involvement would be a betrayal to supporters who were drawn to his promise to end U.S. involvement in expensive and endless wars.

Reporting by Sam Mednick, Aamer Madhani and David Rising, Associated Press. AP writers Mehmet Guzel, Josef Federman, Samy Magdy, Matthew Lee, Josh Boak, Farnoush Amiri and Jon Gambrell contributed.

It has been an eventful year in Michigan politics with the Michigan Legislature dynamically evolving. This week on WDET’s MichMash, Gongwer News Services’ Zach Gorchow and Alethia Kasben analyze the major events in a live recording at the Go Comedy! Improv Theater in Ferndale.

They were joined by Detroit Free Press Politics Editor Emily Lawler and
Politics Editor for The Detroit News, Chad Livengood.

Subscribe to MichMash on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

In this episode:

• Whether the Michigan Legislature will make its July 1 deadline
• Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and her approach to working with President Donald Trump
• How Michigan compares on the national stage in 2025

There has been a major sea change in Michigan politics this year.

With Republicans taking over the state House, President Donald Trump back in the White House, and Democrats maintaining their majority in the state Senate — their is a new dynamic in the state capitol.

“This is the first time that I’ve covered one chamber in Democratic control and one in Republican control,” Lawler said. “…It’s been just an interesting dynamic to watch and sort of see what the chambers are teeing up for each other and what of those things they actually expect to move — which I think is a smaller pool than I initially anticipated.”

Livengood called the current relationship between the chambers a “legislative Red Rover.”

“Getting the actual votes on some of these big issues, like roads, is going to be the real test,” he said.

Kasben pointed out that the Legislature was able to compromise on major legislative efforts like paid sick leave and minimum wage packages in February.

They also talked about the notable shift in how Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has navigated national political dynamics this year, and specifically her relationship with President Trump.

Despite their fraught history, the pair have taken a friendlier tone towards each other in recent months, as they discuss future plans and initiatives for the state of Michigan.

“She’s engaged with him on things that she’s wanted to get done, and I’m not sure that all of those will get done, but certainly Selfridge Air Force Base — the upgrades coming there, the new mission coming there — is significant, that’s something that Michigan has wanted for years,” Lawler said.

But Lawler also noted that Trump isn’t someone Whitmer can rely on politically, pointing to recent discussions about pardoning some of the individuals convicted for conspiring to kidnap her.

–WDET’s Jenny Sherman contributed to this report.

More from WDET:

• MichMash: Live in Lansing!
• Whitmer ‘not happy’ about possible pardons for men involved in her kidnapping plot
• Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall says education budgets could be done by July 1

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal court on Wednesday blocked President Donald Trump from imposing sweeping tariffs on imports under an emergency-powers law, swiftly throwing into doubt Trump’s signature set of economic policies that have rattled global financial markets, frustrated trade partners and raised broader fears about inflation intensifying and the economy slumping.

The ruling from a three-judge panel at the New York-based U.S. Court of International Trade came after several lawsuits arguing Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs exceeded his authority and left the country’s trade policy dependent on his whims.

Trump has repeatedly said the tariffs would force manufacturers to bring back factory jobs to the U.S. and generate enough revenue to reduce federal budget deficits. He used the tariffs as a negotiating cudgel in hopes of forcing other nations to negotiate agreements that favored the U.S., suggesting he would simply set the rates himself if the terms were unsatisfactory.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai said that trade deficits amount to a national emergency “that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind, and weakened our defense industrial base — facts that the court did not dispute.”

The administration, he said, remains “committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness.”

But for now, Trump might not have the threat of import taxes to exact his will on the world economy as he had intended, since doing so would require congressional approval. What remains unclear is whether the White House will respond to the ruling by pausing all of its emergency power tariffs in the interim.

Trump might still be able to temporarily launch import taxes of 15% for 150 days on nations with which the U.S. runs a substantial trade deficit. The ruling notes that a president has this authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.

The ruling amounted to a categorical rejection of the legal underpinnings of some of Trump’s signature and most controversial actions of his four-month-old second term. The administration swiftly filed notice of appeal — and the Supreme Court will almost certainly be called upon to lend a final answer — but it casts a sharp blow.

The case was heard by three judges: Timothy Reif, who was appointed by Trump, Jane Restani, named to the bench by President Ronald Reagan and Gary Katzmann, an appointee of President Barack Obama.

“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court wrote, referring to the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The ruling left in place any tariffs that Trump put in place using his Section 232 powers from the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. He put a 25% tax on most imported autos and parts, as well as on all foreign-made steel and aluminum. Those tariffs depend on a Commerce Department investigation that reveals national security risks from imported products.

It was filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade, a federal court that deals specifically with civil lawsuits involving international trade law.

While tariffs must typically be approved by Congress, Trump has said he has the power to act to address the trade deficits he calls a national emergency.

He is facing at least seven lawsuits challenging the levies. The plaintiffs argued that the emergency powers law does not authorize the use of tariffs, and even if it did, the trade deficit is not an emergency because the U.S. has run a trade deficit with the rest of the world for 49 consecutive years.

Trump imposed tariffs on most of the countries in the world in an effort to reverse America’s massive and long-standing trade deficits. He earlier plastered levies on imports from Canada, China and Mexico to combat the illegal flow of immigrants and the synthetic opioids across the U.S. border.

His administration argues that courts approved then-President Richard Nixon’s emergency use of tariffs in 1971, and that only Congress, and not the courts, can determine the “political” question of whether the president’s rationale for declaring an emergency complies with the law.

Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs shook global financial markets and led many economists to downgrade the outlook for U.S. economic growth. So far, though, the tariffs appear to have had little impact on the world’s largest economy.

The lawsuit was filed by a group of small businesses, including a wine importer, V.O.S. Selections, whose owner has said the tariffs are having a major impact and his company may not survive.

A dozen states also filed suit, led by Oregon. “This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can’t be made on the president’s whim,” Attorney General Dan Rayfield said.

Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said the tariffs had “jacked up prices on groceries and cars, threatened shortages of essential goods and wrecked supply chains for American businesses large and small.″

Reporting by Lindsay Whitehurst and Josh Boak, Associated Press. AP writers Zeke Miller and Paul Wiseman contributed.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct the spelling of the last name of Judge Gary Katzmann, from Katzman in earlier versions of the story.

The U.S. Department of Justice and the White House are looking at pardoning the two men convicted in the 2020 plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

President Donald Trump told reporters on Wednesday that the men convicted in the kidnapping plot were victims of “a railroad job.”

Whitmer shared her reaction to the news with WDET’s Russ McNamara at the Mackinac Policy Conference on Thursday, saying she’s not happy that the justice department — and the president — are even considering pardons.

“When the man took a shot at Donald Trump when he was on the campaign trail in Pennsylvania, I was one of the first office holders on either side of the aisle to condemn it,” Whitmer said. “Anything short of condemning political violence does a disservice to every American.”

Whitmer has been a frequent visitor to the White House this year, asking for federal aid for this spring’s ice storms and helping to secure a new fighter mission at the Selfridge Air National Guard Base.

She said she would be “incredibly disappointed” to see the administration take that action, and that she “certainly will be conveying that to the White House.”

The two men seeking pardons — Barry Croft Jr., 49, and Adam Fox, 42 — were convicted in 2022 of conspiracy for their roles in the alleged kidnapping plot, and are serving a 20-year and 16-year prison sentence, respectively.

On securing a semiconductor ‘fab’ in Michigan

Whitmer also spoke about her stated goal of landing a massive microchip factory for Michigan before the end of her term at the start of 2027. She shared that while federal support would be needed to get the project “over the finish line,” she remains optimistic about getting it done before she leaves office.

“With so many pressures right now in our economy around tariffs and all the chaos, diversifying our economy and landing a chip fab — a plant — it’s so important to all the things that we as Americans rely on and want to do in the future, and this is something that I think would be a huge win for Michigan.”

–WDET’s Jenny Sherman contributed to this report

Use the media player above to hear the full conversation.