Federal prosecutors on Wednesday charged a man with committing a terrorist attack, alleging he poured gasoline on a woman and chased her through a Chicago train car before setting her on fire.
Lawrence Reed was sitting at the back of a car on a Blue Line L train on Monday night when he approached the woman as she sat with her back to him and doused her with gasoline that was in a plastic beverage bottle, according to a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives arrest affidavit.
Click to Gallery
This still image taken from Chicago Transit Authority surveillance footage and included in a federal court record shows a man who federal authorities identified as Lawrence Reed holding a flaming bottle and approaching a passenger, far left, on Monday, Nov. 17, 2025, on a Chicago Blue Line train. (Chicago Transit Authority/U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois via AP)
A Chicago police officer patrols the Clark Street and Lake Street Blue Line stop where a man doused a woman in liquid and set her on fire on the train Monday night, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley)
A Chicago police officer patrols the Clark Street and Lake Street Blue Line stop where a man doused a woman in liquid and set her on fire on the train Monday night, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley)
A train pulls into the Clark Street and Lake Street Blue Line stop where a man doused a woman in liquid and set her on fire on the train Monday night, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley)
The 26-year-old woman fought off the man as he tried to ignite the gas, then she ran from one end of the car to the other as Reed chased her, an investigator said in the affidavit, citing surveillance video from the train. Reed then ignited the bottle, approached the woman and set her on fire, according to the affidavit.
The federal charge against Reed, 50, of Chicago, carries a maximum penalty of life in prison.
Federal court records do not show whether Reed has an attorney representing him in the case. Chicago news outlets reported that Reed was disruptive during his first appearance in a federal court on Wednesday afternoon, including yelling over the judge that he wanted to represent himself and claiming that he was a Chinese citizen.
Reed shouted, “I plead guilty!” repeatedly as the judge tried to advise him of his rights, according to local news reports.
Surveillance video showed Reed at a gas station about 30 minutes before the attack, filling a small container with gasoline, the affidavit says.
After the attack, Reed got off the train at the next stop in downtown Chicago, walking away as the woman stumbled out and fell to the ground, police said. She was taken to a hospital in critical condition with severe burns to her head and body, authorities said. Officials have not released her name.
Chicago police said that when they arrested Reed on Tuesday morning he made incriminating statements about the attack. He was wearing the same clothes as the man who attacked the woman and had burns on his right hand, according to the affidavit.
Reed carried out the attack “with the intent to cause death and serious bodily injury to one or more persons” on the train, the ATF investigator wrote.
Chicago police did not answer questions Wednesday by The Associated Press on whether it had or would refer charges against Reed to state prosecutors, saying questions should be directed to federal authorities.
At a news conference after Reed's court appearance, federal officials expressed frustration that he was free at the time of the attack, saying he had a long criminal history while providing few details.
“Lawrence Reed had no business being on the streets given that his violent criminal history and his pending criminal cases,” ATF Special Agent-in-Charge Christopher Amon said. “Reed had plenty of second chances by the criminal justice system and as a result you have an innocent victim in the hospital fighting for her life.”
U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros said that if the victim were to die from her injuries, the case could be eligible for the death penalty. Illinois abolished the death penalty in 2011.
Asked about Reed’s mental health, Boutros said he was not aware of Reed ever legally being declared mentally incompetent.
Federal officials also said more information about Reed’s criminal history would be discussed at a Friday detention hearing.
The attack drew comparisons to an August stabbing on a commuter train in Charlotte, North Carolina, that left a young woman dead. Federal authorities have charged a man with fatally stabbing 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska, a Ukrainian refugee, in an apparent random attack.
Chicago and other Democratic-led cities have been the focus of intense criticism from President Donald Trump and his administration, who have characterized them as crime-ridden despite a drop in violent crime after a pandemic-era spike.
In a post on social media on Tuesday night, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy highlighted the Chicago train attack.
“This horrific attack is EXACTLY why we need communities to take safety seriously. Blue cities cannot allow another Iryna Zarutska to happen,” Duffy wrote on X.
The Chicago Transit Authority said it was working with police in the investigation and that it has a multipronged approach to security that includes the use of surveillance cameras.
This still image taken from Chicago Transit Authority surveillance footage and included in a federal court record shows a man who federal authorities identified as Lawrence Reed holding a flaming bottle and approaching a passenger, far left, on Monday, Nov. 17, 2025, on a Chicago Blue Line train. (Chicago Transit Authority/U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois via AP)
A Chicago police officer patrols the Clark Street and Lake Street Blue Line stop where a man doused a woman in liquid and set her on fire on the train Monday night, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley)
A Chicago police officer patrols the Clark Street and Lake Street Blue Line stop where a man doused a woman in liquid and set her on fire on the train Monday night, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley)
A train pulls into the Clark Street and Lake Street Blue Line stop where a man doused a woman in liquid and set her on fire on the train Monday night, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Erin Hooley)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments at 10 a.m. ET over the constitutionality of President Donald Trump’s order to end birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to someone in the country illegally or temporarily.
The birthright citizenship order, which Trump signed on Jan. 20, 2025, the first day of his second term, is part of his Republican administration’s broad immigration crackdown.
Trump plans to be in attendance. He will be the first sitting president to attend oral arguments at the nation’s highest court.
Every lower court to have considered the issue has found the order illegal and prevented it from taking effect. A definitive ruling by the nation’s highest court is expected by early summer.
Here’s the latest:
Sauer, Trump’s top Supreme Court lawyer, is at the lectern, defending the president’s birthright citizenship order. Trump is in the courtroom.
On American Samoa, an island cluster in the South Pacific roughly halfway between Hawaii and New Zealand, native-born children are considered “U.S. nationals” — a distinction that gives them certain rights and obligations while denying them others.
American Samoans are entitled to U.S. passports and can serve in the military. Men must register for the Selective Service. They can vote in local elections in American Samoa but cannot hold public office in the U.S. or participate in most U.S. elections.
Those who wish to become citizens can do so, but the process costs hundreds of dollars and can be cumbersome. In 2022, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal seeking to extend birthright citizenship to American Samoa.
An Alaska appeals court is weighing whether to dismiss criminal charges against an Alaska resident born in American Samoa after she was elected to a local school board.
Crowds watched from the sidewalks as Trump’s motorcade drove along Constitution and Independence Avenues, passing the Washington Monument and the National Mall on the way to the court building.
Justice Felix Frankfurter, a native of Austria, was the last of six justices who were born abroad. The current court is American from birth.
Still, the citizenship issue hits close to home for some justices.
Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson are descended from enslaved people who eventually had their citizenship established by the 14th Amendment.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s parents were born in Puerto Rico, where residents became citizens under a 1917 law enacted by Congress. The justice most closely tied to an immigrant is Alito, whose father was born in Italy.
Way back in 1841, former President John Quincy Adams represented a shipload of African men and women who had been sold into slavery in the famous Amistad case.
Former President William Howard Taft became chief justice nearly eight years after leaving the White House in 1913. Charles Evans Hughes left the Supreme Court for a presidential run in 1912, which he nearly won, then returned to the court in 1930 as chief justice.
In 1966, Richard Nixon argued his only Supreme Court case, which he lost.
Twenty-four Democratic state attorneys general put out a statement Wednesday morning saying they’re “proud to lead the fight against this unlawful order.”
While Democratic attorneys general have sued the Trump administration scores of times, the plaintiffs in this case are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and other civil rights groups.
The Democratic attorneys filed court papers supporting their position. Twenty-five of their Republican counterparts filed a friend-of-the-court brief backing the Trump administration.
The only state sitting this one out is New Hampshire.
More than 250,000 babies born in the U.S. each year would not be citizens, according to research from the Migration Policy Institute and Pennsylvania State University’s Population Research Institute.
The order would only apply going forward, the administration has said. But opponents have said a court ruling in Trump’s favor could pave the way for a later effort to take away citizenship from people who were born to parents who were not themselves U.S. citizens.
The president and first lady Melania Trump showed up for the court ritual marking the arrival of a new justice following the confirmations of Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017 and Justice Brett Kavanaugh a year later.
The ceremony for Trump’s third appointee, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, was delayed a year because of the COVID-19 pandemic and Trump, who was no longer in office, did not attend.
Traditionally the president has avoided attending arguments to maintain distance between the government branches — since the executive officer’s presence is seen by many as a way to pressure the independent court to rule in their favor.
Given the unusual nature of it all — Trump’s presence in the courtroom spotlights how high the stakes are for him, as the court’s decision will have massive consequences on his longstanding promise to crack down on immigration.
Last year, Trump said that he badly wanted to attend a hearing on whether he overstepped federal law with his sweeping tariffs, but he decided against it, saying it would have been a distraction.
Adam Winkler, a constitutional law professor at UCLA, told the The Associated Press that Trump’s attending SCOTUS oral arguments signals how important the president views this case.
However, Trump’s presence “is unlikely to sway the justices,” Winkler said, adding that the SCOTUS justices “pride themselves in their independence, even if some agree with much of Trump’s agenda.”
The fanfare of Trump being in the courtroom will make for a different experience for the justices themselves, however, as “Trump’s presence will make the atmosphere a little bit more circus-like,” Winkler said.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer is making his ninth Supreme Court argument and second in as many weeks. Sauer’s biggest win to date was the presidential immunity decision that spared Trump from being tried for his effort to overturn the 2020 election.
Sauer was a Supreme Court law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia early in his legal career.
ACLU legal director Cecillia Wang, the child of Chinese immigrants, is presenting her second argument to the Supreme Court. In the first Trump administration, a 5-4 conservative majority ruled against Wang’s clients in another immigration case.
It’s not an April Fool’s joke. Alito was born this day in 1950. Only Thomas, who turns 78 in June, is older than Alito among the nine justices.
In the post-pandemic era, the other justices allow the 77-year-old Thomas, the longest-serving member of the court, to pose a question or two before the free-for-all begins.
In a second round of questioning, the justices ask questions in order of seniority. Chief Justice John Roberts, whose center chair makes him the most senior, gets the first crack.
The justices have routinely gone beyond the allotted time since returning to the courtroom following the Covid-19 pandemic.
A buzzer and the court marshal’s cry, “All rise,” signal the justices’ entrance from behind red curtains. The livestream won’t kick in for several minutes, until after the ceremonial swearing-in of lawyers to the Supreme Court bar.
FILE - The U.S. Supreme Court is seen in Washington on Feb. 24, 2026. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)
People arrive to walk inside the U.S. Supreme Court, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, April 1, 2026. The Supreme Court justices will hear oral arguments today on whether President Donald Trump can deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
