| Outcome | Probability | Yes Bid | Yes Ask | 24h Change | Volume | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Event does not qualify | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Constitution / Constitutional | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Amicus | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Immigrant / Immigration | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Stateless | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Tourist / Tourism | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Illegal Alien | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Wong Kim | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Healthcare | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Hospital | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| China | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Precedent | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Deport / Deportation | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Slaughter | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Maternity | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
This market tracks the specific commentary and legal inquiries posed by U.S. Supreme Court Justices during hearings regarding potential challenges to birthright citizenship. It provides insight into the judicial branch's evolving interpretation of the 14th Amendment and its application to modern immigration policy.
Birthright citizenship, guaranteed under the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, has been a subject of long-standing constitutional debate. Political figures have periodically questioned whether the clause applies to children born to non-citizens, despite the 1898 precedent set in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. This market captures the discourse during proceedings that could potentially revisit or reaffirm these established constitutional principles.
Market prices represent the collective expectation of participants regarding the likelihood of specific phrases or legal themes being voiced by the Justices during oral arguments.
Statements are verified based on official Supreme Court transcripts and audio recordings released following the oral arguments.
No, this market specifically tracks comments made during the oral argument phase of the hearing.
Justices often use oral arguments to test the boundaries of existing law; they may ask hypothetical questions to see if an attorney can reconcile their argument with past rulings like Wong Kim Ark.
Yes, if the outcome is tied to a specific phrase or line of inquiry, a single clear statement from any Justice on the bench will typically trigger the resolution criteria.
If the Court does not hold a hearing, the market will resolve according to the specific contingency rules set out in the contract terms regarding non-events.