The first sentence of Section I of the 14th Amendment — a small piece in our grand Constitutional puzzle  — has left Justice Samuel Alito and his colleagues considering it a puzzle wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a mystery — along with the rest of America. It reads: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” As the Supreme Court hears arguments in Trump v. Barbara — the birthright citizenship case now before the nation’s highest court — America is finally confronting a constitutional question that should have been settled long ago: Who, exactly, is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States? Under the prevailing interpretation of this clause, any child born on U.S. soil is automatically an American citizen — full stop. It doesn’t matter whether the mother is a permanent resident, a tourist on a 90-day visa, or someone who crossed the border illegally last Sunday. Born here, citizen here, benefits and rights that come with an American citizenship — activated. On his first day back in office in January 2025, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14160, directing federal agencies to stop issuing citizenship documents to children born here to parents who are either unlawfully present or lawfully present only on a temporary basis. Essentially, if neither of your parents is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, the Trump administration says the 14th Amendment does not guarantee your child citizenship simply by virtue of being born on American soil. Predictably, lower courts blocked the order. Now it’s before the Supreme Court. Regardless of the outcome, it’s a legal win for the Trump administration — but the broader debate placed a spotlight on a flaw the Founders and post-Civil War Congress never contemplated: the deliberate weaponization of birthright citizenship by adversarial nations. One slice of the problem reveals the amendment’s most cynical exploitation: birth tourism, especially by China. This is an organized, for-profit industry that treats American passports as a commodity. Author and political consultant Peter Schweizer recently documented what he describes as a “massive effort” by Chinese nationals — many with Communist Party ties — to secure U.S. citizenship for children raised entirely in China. He estimates that between 750,000 and 1.5 million Chinese-born U.S. citizens are currently being educated under CCP indoctrination. The business model is brazen. Chinese companies advertise packages costing $40,000 to $80,000. Pregnant women fly in, stay at maternity hotels — often in California — deliver in American hospitals, obtain U.S. birth certificates and passports, and return home. Federal prosecutors have worked to dismantle high-profile rings: in one Southern California case, operators of USA Happy Baby and similar outfits were convicted of conspiracy and money laundering for running maternity houses that served thousands of Chinese clients. The U.S. government has identified hundreds of such firms operating inside China with the sole purpose of gaming our immigration system. Birth tourism is not the numerical majority — illegal residents produce far more births — but it’s uniquely corrosive. These children are raised abroad with zero lived connection to America. At 21, they gain full voting rights, access to classified jobs, and the power to sponsor their parents for green cards. It is demographic arbitrage. Beijing is cultivating a reserve of future “anchor citizens” capable of influencing American elections and policy from within, while owing their primary loyalty elsewhere. The clause that has long been glossed over — “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” — will be central to the administration in oral arguments. The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to overturn the Dred Scott decision and secure citizenship for the children of freed slaves. Its authors understood “jurisdiction” to mean full political allegiance, not mere physical presence. Diplomats’ children, children of invading armies, and those whose parents owed no permanent duty to the United States were explicitly excluded. The Supreme Court’s 1898 United States v. Wong Kim Ark decision granted citizenship to the child of legal, domiciled Chinese immigrants, but nothing about illegal entrants or short-term visitors. Illegal immigration on today’s scale and the jet-age business of birth tourism simply did not exist. As Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro has argued, the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means you are NOT subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign nation. He makes the point — if an illegal immigrant from Mexico gives birth on U.S. soil, that child remains a Mexican citizen under Mexican law — the child is NOT solely subject to American jurisdiction. As of 2023, the Pew Research Center estimates roughly 320,000 children are born each year to unauthorized or temporary-migrant mothers, meaning approximately 1 in 10 children born in the United States is born to an illegal immigrant mother. The vast majority of these children are born to parents who intend to stay and raise them here. Those children receive the same benefits as any other American citizen, and they can eventually sponsor their parents for legal residency — a process commonly known as chain migration. In the meantime, 59% of non-citizen households use one or more major federal welfare programs, compared to 33% of native-born households. It is these citizen children — not their illegal parents, who are often eligible for direct benefits — who strain schools, hospitals, and education services. The Supreme Court may rule that the executive branch cannot, for now, rewrite 150 years of precedent. But the debate itself has been clarifying. The 14th Amendment was not written to hand foreign nationals a backdoor into American democracy nor to grant them a nine-month maternity vacation. It’s long past time to unravel that mystery.

Politico, the Washington insider outlet that bills itself as a “leading destination for non-partisan news and unbiased policy coverage,” has been paying for the services of a liberal mega-donor who has already forked over six figures directly to the Democrat Party this calendar year. First appearing in a February newsletter from Politico Influence, its daily bulletin on the swampy world of lobbyists in the nation’s capital, was a disclosure that one of the biggest figures in the industry, Invariant, is now working for Politico. Invariant is the influence shop founded and run by Heather Podesta, the former wife of lobbyist Tony Podesta and longtime power-player in Democrat politics. “POLITICO is a client of Invariant,” read the disclosure, which has appeared in at least seven disclosures since the middle of February. Podesta has contributed more than $250,000 to Democrat candidates and committees this election cycle, including the maximum allowed $44,500 to both the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Over the years, Podesta has given millions of dollars to Democrats. It is unclear what Invariant is providing for Politico. Neither responded to a request for comment. Invariant offers not only lobbying, but also public relations and crisis management. The firm brought in over $47 million from lobbying clients in 2025, according to figures compiled by Open Secrets. The addition of Invariant comes just a few months after Politico brought in a veteran Democrat operative to be its head of communications. The operative, Evan Hollander, was named senior vice president of communications, a post he picked up after years of crafting messaging for House Democrats, according to a report from the Free Beacon.  Politico also found itself in hot water in recent weeks over a cartoon that depicted President Donald Trump and Republican senators Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham wearing blood-covered Jewish prayer shawls and yarmulkes. The cartoon was taken down with an editor’s note saying it did not “meet our standards,” but only saying it could be “reasonably interpreted” to be “hateful.” It is unclear whether Podesta and Invariant were involved with crafting the statement. Politico just added a new editor-in-chief, Jonathan Greenberger, who will take the helm in May.

President Donald Trump made the largest military spending request in history on Friday, with a proposed budget for the 2027 fiscal year of $1.5 trillion in defense spending, of which $1.1 trillion would be allocated for the Department of War and $350 billion specifically for critical munitions. The record request was announced in January after former Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro’s capture, but before the United States launched attacks on Iran. To pay for the uptick in defense spending, the White House proposes to reduce non-defense spending by 10%. The White House says the spending request reflects the current global threat environment and restores the readiness and lethality of the United States military. The money would also include a salary increase for all military personnel, with junior enlisted members receiving the largest salary bump at 7%. Mid-level service members, E-6 to O-3, would receive a 6% pay raise, and higher-ranking officers would receive a 5% raise. The White House predicts the increase will help with service member retention and recruiting efforts. Funds would also be directed to the construction of the United States’ “Golden Dome,” which would be similar to Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system. The Golden Dome would track missiles through launch, in midcourse, and on their descent, potentially using space-based technology to intercept missiles. Unlike Israel’s Iron Dome, America’s Golden Dome would aim to stop long-range missiles and potentially hypersonic weapons, which are a growing concern posed by adversaries like China, Russia, and North Korea.  The budget would also focus on “making shipbuilding great again,” adding 18 battle force ships and 16 non-battle force ships to the United States naval fleet. By ship count, China currently has the largest navy, with the United States in second place. Another large category of investment will be in critical mineral stockpiles. Currently, the United States Department of the Interior lists 60 minerals as critical, of which 15 are rare earth elements. The list ranges from aluminum to zinc, and the push reflects a broader strategy Trump employed in global negotiations. The president pushed to bring steel and aluminum production back to the United States while also taking a stake in MP Materials, which is the only fully integrated rare earth producer in America. Rare earth minerals are used in magnets and batteries, as well as defense applications and AI chips, making them a national security priority. One of the Senate’s most prominent fiscal hawks, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), told The Daily Wire: “With total debt approaching $39 trillion, reduced spending in other areas will be required,” and “aggressively eliminating the $700 billion to $1 trillion in annual fraud would be the primary target.” Johnson sees the road to getting the president’s request passed before the fiscal year begins on October 1 as challenging. “Even though defense of our nation is the top priority of the government, Democrats will not support the president’s request,” said Johnson. The senator sees two paths ahead: Republicans voting to end the filibuster or pursuing a reconciliation appropriation process to get Republican votes. If Republicans take the nuclear option, they would be able to pass bills with a simple majority of 51 votes instead of 60. The reconciliation appropriation process would also be challenging due to the Byrd Rule, which allows senators to block or remove parts of a reconciliation deal. A provision can be stripped out unless 60 senators vote to keep it, and with Republicans holding 53 seats, the road to 60 would be challenging. President Trump signaled on Wednesday that defense spending is a top priority. “We’re fighting wars. It’s not possible for us to take care of day care, Medicaid, Medicare—all these individual things. They can do it on a state basis. You can’t do it on a federal.” The federal government currently runs a deficit of $2 trillion. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the initial plan was for him to raise the United States’ revenue by $1 trillion and for Elon Musk to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse by spending $1 trillion to balance the budget. Lutnick and Trump launched tariffs to increase revenue and created the gold card, which charges foreigners $1 million for United States residency on the condition of background check approval. Revenues and spending cuts have fallen short of these expectations, creating tensions around increased military spending amid a runaway budget.

The Trump administration arrested the president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, the Department of Homeland Security said on Thursday, describing the man as a Jordanian terrorist. Salah Sarsour, who has lived in the United States for over 30 years, was convicted in Israel as a teenager after throwing molotov cocktails at the homes of Israeli soldiers. He has also been accused of helping raise money for Hamas in the 1990s. Sarsour was issued a green card under former President Bill Clinton after lying on his immigration application, Homeland Security said. Sarsour has been the president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee for the past five years. The society is the largest Islamic group in Wisconsin, The New York Times reported. He is also a board member of the American Muslims for Palestine, a group that has faced scrutiny over alleged links to Hamas and its support for intifada in the wake of Hamas’ October 7, 2023, terrorist attack on Israel. “This terrorist will remain in ICE custody pending removal proceedings,” DHS said. Today, @ICEgov arrested a Jordanian national with a prior conviction for THROWING A MOLOTOV COCKTAIL at the homes of Israeli Forces. He lied on his immigration application and became a green card holder under President Clinton. This terrorist will remain in ICE custody pending… https://t.co/L38liuCxVy pic.twitter.com/9IXWuo0t0f — Homeland Security (@DHSgov) April 2, 2026 The Trump administration posted the description and photo of Sarsour on social media in response to Wisconsin Democratic Governor Tony Evers criticizing the administration over Sarsour’s arrest. “Targeting people because of their beliefs or background is wrong,” Evers said. “This is clearly about sowing division and fear and doesn’t help make Wisconsin safer. I’m thinking of Mr. Sarsour’s family in this difficult time, and I join [Rep. Gwen Moore] in calling for his immediate release.” Sarsour’s attorney said the Milwaukee Muslim leader received deportation papers from the Trump administration, which said that the State Department determined Sarsour “poses an adverse consequence to foreign policy considerations.” The man’s attorneys argued that the Trump administration is only targeting Sarsour because of his anti-Israel views, adding that Sarsour has no criminal record in the United States. Hundreds of Muslims gathered for a rally at the Islamic Society of Milwaukee’s Salam School gym following the arrest of Sarsour, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported. Othman Atta, the executive director of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee mosque told the crowd, “They want to criminalize advocacy for Palestine. That is the only reason that he is being targeted. There is nothing else.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio has vowed to strip the legal status of immigrants found to be “Hamas supporters.” Last year, the Trump administration arrested pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, who led anti-Israel and anti-America demonstrations at Columbia University after the October 7 attack. The Trump administration won a legal victory in January over its arrest of Khalil when a federal court ruled that he could be taken back into custody after a lower court ordered his release.

Supporters of Attorney General Ken Paxton (R-TX) were divided by the news of Attorney General Pam Bondi’s ouster over whether Paxton should be considered for the national job or should remain in the fight to replace John Cornyn. Paxton is currently in a heated Republican runoff with incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, with President Donald Trump yet to issue an endorsement ahead of the May 26 contest. If Paxton were to be tapped for a national position and drop out of the race, it would effectively clear the field for Cornyn and set the general election matchup against Democrat James Talarico. The Daily Wire could not confirm whether Paxton is actually being considered. Other names circulating in Republican circles include EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, DOJ Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Harmeet Dhillon, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, and Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO). Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet also floated Paxton’s name, alongside others like Zeldin, Dhillon, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought. Kolvet said the next individual has “to be ruthless and smart and impossible to distract or slow down.” The spokesman for the conservative group said that he’s been told that former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), who was Trump’s withdrawn pick for the role last year, is not “pursuing” the job. With Bondi departing, I have a few people in mind to be the next AG, who’s your pick? • Harmeet Dhillon • Lee Zeldin • Ken Paxton • Jeanine Pirro • Ron DeSantis • Russ Vought (but he’s great at OMB) Has to be ruthless and smart and impossible to distract or slow down.… — Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKolvet) April 2, 2026 Online speculation intensified following posts from conservative commentators and political observers, many of whom argued Paxton would have a greater impact as attorney general than as a U.S. senator. “Bondi is OUT,” conservative influencer “Red Eagle Politics” posted to X on Thursday. “Ken Paxton should be our next AG. He can make a massive impact in that role, whereas in the Senate he would just be one vote out of 100.” The prediction market Kalshi gives Paxton roughly a 4% chance of becoming Trump’s nominee, compared to 57% for Zeldin and 31% for interim Attorney General Todd Blanche. One X post from Daily Wire reporter Mary Margaret Olohan listed several names being discussed: People close to the White House are throwing around a lot of names for the next attorney general. Here’s a few of the names I’ve had mentioned to me today: – Mike Lee – Harmeet Dhillon – Ashley Moody – Lee Zeldin – Eric Schmitt — Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) April 2, 2026 Others pointed out that the brutal nature of the primary, which has highlighted Paxton’s past personal and professional controversies, could complicate the potential confirmation process. “I think there’s a non-zero chance Trump tries to replace Pam Bondi with Texas’s Ken Paxton and rams the vote through an otherwise hesitant Senate by promising that since Cornyn would then become the TX Senate nominee, odds to keep the chamber go up,” Michigan State University policy professor Josh Cowen wrote on X. Some conservatives pushed back on the Paxton buzz, saying he should remain in the Senate race to challenge Cornyn. “Watch for the horse trading to put Ken Paxton up for AG thus making Cornyn the senator from Texas again,” conservative commentator Chad Caton wrote. “THIS CANT HAPPEN. We must rid ourselves of the power and influence that John Cornyn wields. Ken Paxton must be the next Senator from Texas.” Democrats also suggested that Paxton could be the pick to take on the top law enforcement role in the Trump administration. “Depending on how low he wants to go, I figure he goes with Ken Paxton to replace Bondi. Who is scummier than him? Plus he clears the field in Texas for Cornyn,” Democratic activist Paul Jacobs posted to X. “My prediction: with Pam Bondi out, Ken Paxton is next up. Yes, Texas’ scandal-ridden AG who’s currently tripping his way through a primary runoff against John Cornyn,” former liberal political strategist Shea Jordan Smith wrote on Facebook. “They’d much rather send Cornyn into a general election than take a chance on Paxton, who’s radioactive enough to turn a winnable race into a problem… especially with James Talarico on the other side.” The Daily Wire reached out to the Paxton campaign for comment. The Cornyn campaign declined to comment. When asked about Bondi’s status, the White House pointed to a Truth Social post from Trump praising her for doing “a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown in Crime across our country.”