Hi, welcome back to Maine Justice. It is Tuesday morning. July 1st, it is, I can't believe it. It's July 1st. I'm

Andrew Weissman, and I'm here with Mary McCord. Mary, hello, but you know, I just said a lot of you.

It's like two days in a row, yeah.

I just saw you yesterday.

For those people listening, I usually am not like a huge shout out to premium, but I have to say the premium show yesterday.

Like if there's any reason to pay, it's like Tess Bridgwin, who was our guest,

was fantastic. Yep. It's for the deep dive into the authorities related to the strike on Iran,

which at this point literally seems like ancient history, but is not, in fact, ancient history.

And she talks about those sort of ongoing policy implications, and it's a legal deep dive

and a policy deep dive.

Anyway, you can tell we are both very, very enthused by it.

So anyway, Mary, we actually have a lot on our plate, and I actually am dying to talk to you

about it because the main thing we're going to talk about,

at least starting, is your case. But then what else do we have on our plate? Right. And by my case,

it's not just my case. A lot of people have this case. But this is, of course, the Supreme Court's

decision on Friday in the birthright citizenship cases, one being a case that my organization

I kept brought along with co-counsel at CASA and ASAP, the Asylum Seekers Advocacy Project,

on behalf of pregnant women and the members of both of those immigrant rights organizations.

And we had obtained preliminary

injunctions almost immediately after the executive order attempting to limit birthright citizenship

was signed by the president on January 20th. These went up to the Supreme Court because the

government wanted to stay the effect of the universal preliminary injunction. Because what I forgot to say,

...