Trader consensus prices "Yes" at 91% implied probability that SCOTUS will strike down President Trump's Executive Order 14160 limiting birthright citizenship, driven by April 1 oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara where a majority of justices, including conservatives Chief Justice Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, expressed deep skepticism toward reinterpreting the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause via executive action alone. Roberts quipped on birth tourism, "It's a new world. It's the same Constitution," while Gorsuch questioned reliance on historical precedents like United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). Recent coverage of the looming end-of-June ruling has reinforced this positioning, though Justices Thomas and Alito appeared more receptive, leaving slim room for an upset.
Résumé expérimental généré par IA à partir des données Polymarket. Ceci n'est pas un conseil de trading et ne joue aucun rôle dans la résolution de ce marché. · Mis à jourOui
$121,523 Vol.
$121,523 Vol.
Oui
$121,523 Vol.
$121,523 Vol.
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If the Executive Order is withdrawn prior to any qualifying Supreme Court ruling on the order, this market will resolve to “No”.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.
Marché ouvert : 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...Trader consensus prices "Yes" at 91% implied probability that SCOTUS will strike down President Trump's Executive Order 14160 limiting birthright citizenship, driven by April 1 oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara where a majority of justices, including conservatives Chief Justice Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, expressed deep skepticism toward reinterpreting the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause via executive action alone. Roberts quipped on birth tourism, "It's a new world. It's the same Constitution," while Gorsuch questioned reliance on historical precedents like United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). Recent coverage of the looming end-of-June ruling has reinforced this positioning, though Justices Thomas and Alito appeared more receptive, leaving slim room for an upset.
Résumé expérimental généré par IA à partir des données Polymarket. Ceci n'est pas un conseil de trading et ne joue aucun rôle dans la résolution de ce marché. · Mis à jour
Méfiez-vous des liens externes.
Méfiez-vous des liens externes.
Questions fréquentes