Arguments

• Jury staat op het punt te beraadslagen en een vonnis te vellen over de vraag of het AI-bedrijf en Altman aansprakelijk zijn in deze zaak

Trial is culmination of a years-long feud between Musk and Altman that has become increasingly viciousThe trial pitting Elon Musk against Sam Altman and OpenAI began in earnest on Tuesday with opening arguments, as lawyers for the two tech moguls seek to convince a California jury of their client’s version of the AI company’s history. The trial is set to feature testimony from both billionaires, as well as some of the most powerful executives in the tech industry.Musk argues that Altman, OpenAI and its president Greg Brockman broke a foundational agreement to better humanity when the non-profit pivoted towards a for-profit structure. Musk, who left OpenAI in 2018 after co-founding it with Altman and Brockman three years earlier, also alleges that his co-founders unjustly enriched themselves as the company raised billions of dollars and grew into the AI behemoth it is today. Continue reading...

• The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday, April 1, 2026, in Trump v. Barbara, a case challenging the constitutionality of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. • President Donald Trump attended the arguments in person, making him the first sitting president to observe Supreme Court oral arguments, according to historians cited by Politico. • The case centers on Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, with the Court expected to issue a ruling later in the term that could fundamentally alter citizenship eligibility in the United States.

Court case will weigh the constitutionality of his contentious bid to end birthright citizenship President Donald Trump will watch the US supreme court hear a landmark case today weighing the constitutionality of his contentious bid to end birthright citizenship – an extraordinary and possibly unprecedented move for the nation’s highest office.Trump signed an executive order on his return to the White House decreeing that children born to parents in the United States illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become US citizens.Trump signed an executive order seeking to restrict mail-in voting across the US with a series of new requirements, including the establishment of a national voter list.The move was unprecedented and likely unconstitutional, according to experts. The Brennan Center said in response, “He has no lawful authority to write the rules that govern our elections. He tried a year ago; we sued him; we won. A year later, he has tried again. He can expect the same result.”Several states and Democratic officials criticized the order, describing it as an illegal attack that amounted to voter suppression ahead of the midterms, and said they will take legal action to stop the president, including California.Trump continued to fume over today’s ruling from a US judge that halted the construction of his $400m White House ballroom, and sharply criticized the decision during a press briefing and on social media.Pete Hegseth lifted the suspension of the crew of the military helicopters that hovered near the home of singer Kid Rock, and said there would be no investigation. Continue reading...

Case focuses on RNC’s challenge to a Mississippi law that allows ballots to count if they are arrive after election dayUS politics live – latest updatesThe US supreme court is hearing arguments Monday about whether mail-in ballots can be counted if they arrive after election day, which would affect laws in more than a dozen states during a midterm election year.The justice are considering Watson v Republican National Committee, a challenge over a Mississippi state law that was brought in 2024 by the Republican party. Mississippi allows mailed ballots to be counted if they arrive within five business days of election day, so long as they were postmarked by election day. Fourteen states, Washington DC and three US territories have similar laws that allow for late-arriving ballots to be counted. Continue reading...

• The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear arguments over the Trump administration's effort to terminate temporary protected status (TPS) for migrants from Haiti, Syria, and other nations fleeing war and disasters. • Lower courts had blocked the end of protections allowing TPS holders to live and work legally in the U.S., prompting a Justice Department appeal. • The justices declined to immediately lift the protections, delaying action until hearings in coming weeks, following their prior ruling exposing 600,000 Venezuelans to deportation.