Following April 1 oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara challenging Executive Order 14160—which denies birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment's jurisdiction clause to U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants or non-permanent residents—a majority of Supreme Court justices, including conservatives like Barrett, expressed deep skepticism toward the administration's position. Lower courts had already issued nationwide injunctions blocking the order as conflicting with longstanding precedent from United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), reinforcing trader consensus at 93% implied probability of SCOTUS striking it down. While Solicitor General Sauer defended narrow application, justices highlighted contradictions with historical intent, such as excluding freed slaves' children; a ruling is expected by late June absent extensions.
Polymarket verilerine atıfta bulunan deneysel AI tarafından oluşturulmuş özet. Bu bir işlem tavsiyesi değildir ve bu piyasanın nasıl çözümlendiğinde hiçbir rolü yoktur. · GüncellendiEvet
$107,733 Hac.
$107,733 Hac.
Evet
$107,733 Hac.
$107,733 Hac.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if the Supreme Court of the United States rules that Donald Trump’s Executive Order “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” may not be enforced to deny citizenship to children born in the United States, by July 30, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
A qualifying ruling must clearly and finally rule that the order, in whole, is unconstitutional or cannot lawfully take effect, or that the order cannot be enforced to deny citizenship to children born in the United States.
Procedural rulings that do not clearly resolve whether the order may lawfully be enforced to deny citizenship to children born in the United States will not be sufficient to resolve this market to “Yes”.
If a Supreme Court ruling on this case clearly and finally permits the order to deny citizenship to children born in the United States, this market will resolve to “No”.
If the Executive Order is withdrawn prior to any qualifying Supreme Court ruling on the order, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Piyasa Açıldı: Mar 31, 2026, 2:54 PM ET
Resolver
0x65070BE91...This market will resolve to “Yes” if the Supreme Court of the United States rules that Donald Trump’s Executive Order “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” may not be enforced to deny citizenship to children born in the United States, by July 30, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
A qualifying ruling must clearly and finally rule that the order, in whole, is unconstitutional or cannot lawfully take effect, or that the order cannot be enforced to deny citizenship to children born in the United States.
Procedural rulings that do not clearly resolve whether the order may lawfully be enforced to deny citizenship to children born in the United States will not be sufficient to resolve this market to “Yes”.
If a Supreme Court ruling on this case clearly and finally permits the order to deny citizenship to children born in the United States, this market will resolve to “No”.
If the Executive Order is withdrawn prior to any qualifying Supreme Court ruling on the order, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Resolver
0x65070BE91...Following April 1 oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara challenging Executive Order 14160—which denies birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment's jurisdiction clause to U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants or non-permanent residents—a majority of Supreme Court justices, including conservatives like Barrett, expressed deep skepticism toward the administration's position. Lower courts had already issued nationwide injunctions blocking the order as conflicting with longstanding precedent from United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), reinforcing trader consensus at 93% implied probability of SCOTUS striking it down. While Solicitor General Sauer defended narrow application, justices highlighted contradictions with historical intent, such as excluding freed slaves' children; a ruling is expected by late June absent extensions.
Polymarket verilerine atıfta bulunan deneysel AI tarafından oluşturulmuş özet. Bu bir işlem tavsiyesi değildir ve bu piyasanın nasıl çözümlendiğinde hiçbir rolü yoktur. · Güncellendi
Harici bağlantılara dikkat edin.
Harici bağlantılara dikkat edin.
Sıkça Sorulan Sorular