reported speech interrogative

English With Ashish

Interrogative sentences in reported speech: rules and examples

Hey learners! In this post, we will master how to change direct speech to indirect speech when the reported speech in the direct speech is an interrogative sentence. Before we do that, we must know what direct and indirect speech is.

What is a direct speech?

Direct speech definition: It is a way to narrate what someone said using the speaker’s exact words. The reported speech (the speaker’s words) is placed in quotation marks and is offset using a comma.

What is an indirect speech?

Indirect speech definition: it is a way to narrate what someone said but not using the speaker’s exact words. Unlike a direct speech, it is not placed in quotation marks and separated by a comma.

Direct speech: She said to me, “Do you love me?” Indirect speech: She told me if I loved her.

Important things to understand :

1. Directing speech: It is the part (clause) that you (the person who narrates the speaker’s original words) say. In the above examples, “She said to me” and “She told me” are reporting speeches. These are the parts the narrator of the reported speech says.

2. Directed speech: it is the part that comes from the original speaker. In the above examples, “ Do you love me? “ and “ if I loved her “ are reported speeches.

Interrogative sentences in the reported speech

Interrogative sentence definition: Sentences that are used to ask questions are called interrogative sentences. They end with a question mark.

There are two types of interrogative sentences:

• Ones that can be answered in YES or NO .
• Ones that can not be answered in YES or NO . They need to be explained.
• Direct speech : My uncle said to me, “What are you studying?”
• Direct speech : She asked me, “Do you still love me?”
• Indirect speech: My uncle asked me what I was studying.
• Indirect speech: She asked me if I still loved her .

NOTE : Interrogative sentences in direct speech are changed into assertive sentences.

Process/steps of changing Interrogative sentences (reported speech) into indirect speech:

• Remove the quotation marks and the comma from the reported speech.
• Put the question word (WH family word) at the beginning of the reported speech when the question can’t be answered in YES or NO. If the question can be answered in YES/NO, replace the helping verb (auxiliary) with IF or WHETHER.
• Put the subject of the reported speech after it.
• Put the verb after the subject.
• Replace the question mark with a period/full stop.
• The reporting verb SAY in the direct speech is changed into ASK/INQUIRE.

NOTE : Interrogative sentences that can be answered in YES/NO start with auxiliary verbs (is/am/are/do/does/has/have/will/shall/can/could/may/might/should/would…). And interrogative sentences that can’t be answered in simple YES/NO start with WH family words (what/why/where/when/how/who/whom).

Direct speech structure : Auxiliary verb + subject + main verb + subject complement? Auxiliary verb + subject + main verb + object/modifier?

Indirect speech structure : If/whether + subject + main verb + subject complement. If/whether + subject + main verb + object/modifier.

• Direct speech: I asked her, “Will you go out with me?” Indirect speech: I asked her if/whether she would go out with me.
• Direct speech: The guy on the street said to me, ” Do you know whom you are messing with?” Indirect speech: The guy on the street asked me if I knew whom I was messing with.
• Direct speech: On the very first date, she asked me, “Have you kissed a girl?” Indirect speech: On the very first date, she asked me if I had kissed a girl.
• Direct speech: The other night, Jon asked me, “Are you taking drugs?” Indirect speech: The other night, Jon asked me if I was taking drugs.
• Direct speech: She said, “Can you kiss me right now?” Indirect speech: She asked if I could kiss her right then.

In the indirect speech of the reported part, we replace the auxiliary verb with IF or WHETHER . The subject is put before the verb so that the interrogative sentence changes into an assertive sentence.

All these questions can be answered in YES/NO. If the questions can’t be answered in YES/NO, don’t use if/whether . Let’s look at the following examples:

Direct speech structure : WH family word + auxiliary verb + subject + main verb + object/modifier (optional)?

Indirect speech structure : WH family word + subject + main verb + object/modifier.

• Direct speech: The police asked, “What were you doing when the incident happened?” Indirect speech: The police asked what I had been doing when the incident had happened .
• Direct speech: He said, “What can I do for you?” Indirect speech: He asked what he could for me.
• Direct speech: Ron asked my father, “What do you do?” Indirect speech: Ron asked my father what he did.
• Direct speech: She said to us, “What do you think of yourselves?” Indirect speech: She asked us what we thought of ourselves.
• Direct speech: My brother asked, “Who is that girl?” Indirect speech: My brother asked who that girl was.

Now, we know how to change an interrogative sentence into a reported speech. Feel free to share your question, doubt, or feedback in the comment section, and also, share the post with the people that need it.

For one-on-one classes, contact me at  [email protected] .

Watch my YouTube lesson on how to change direct speech to indirect when the reported speech is an interrogative sentence:

Ashish Sharma

Ashish found his first love—the English language—a few years back. Since then, he has been immersed in the language, breaking down the language and teaching it to passionate English learners. He has a flair for listening to the English language (podcasts, sitcoms, stories), observing the nuances, and making it easy for English learners. He is known for breaking down complex English topics and making them easy to be understood.

15 thoughts on “Interrogative sentences in reported speech: rules and examples”

Sir in the Wh-question u make wrong indirect speech . Ex.1 The police asked, “what were you doing when the incident happened..? ” Ans-The police asked what I had been doing when the incident had happened.. Plz check this ex if I will wrong then plz tell me where I was wrong…

Hello, Ritesh! Yes, I had forgotten to change the subject of the clause from YOU to I. Thank you for pointing out the mistake!

Sunil said to Sunita, “What was the theme of the story?”

Sunil asked Sunita what the theme of the story was.

Sunita asked sunil that what was the theme of the story. Is it correct or not

It’s not. Correction: Sunita asked Sunil what the theme of the story was. 1) We don’t use two conjunctions together. We can’t. 2) A noun clause does not take a question structure (use inversion in it).

Can it not be, Sunil asked Sunita what had been the theme of the story.

That’s grammatical incorrect. A verb or a verb phrase can’t come before the subject in a dependent clause. Also, the right verb tense of the reported speech is the Simple Past tense.

“Be not so amazed, daughter Miranda”,said Prospero. change this.

That’s not a question.

Calling Miranda as his daughter Prospero forbade/advised her not to be amazed.

the gate keeper said,” who made this mess?”

The gatekeeper asked whom that mess had been made by.

He said to me,” do you know him kiran”.

He asked if me I knew him/kiran.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• Reported Speech /

Reported Speech Interrogative: Rules, Examples & Exercise

• Updated on  
• Mar 11, 2024

Reported Speech Interrogative : Imagine a scenario where you’re in a formal setting, addressing a respected individual. Instead of asking, “Can you please pass the salt?” ie, (Direct Speech), you could say, “I wondered if you could kindly pass me the salt.” (Indirect Speech). This is one of the many instances of Reported Speech Interrogative and how it changes the tone of your question. However, there are certain rules you would need to master to attain this subtle shift of tone and convey your request without losing the decorum of the situation. 

Therefore, without any further ado, delve deeper into this blog on Reported Speech Interrogative and learn in detail about its rules, skim through its examples and exercises. So that, you can attain a greater height of the mountain called English Grammar . 

This Blog Includes:

Yes/no questions, wh-questions, examples of reported speech interrogative, reported speech interrogative exercise for practise, rules for reported speech interrogative.

When it comes to changing a Direct Speech to an Indirect Reported Speech Interrogative, you cannot skip following these essential rules:

Replace the reporting verb “said/told” with an appropriate interrogative verb.   

• Common interrogative verbs include “asked,” “enquired,” “wondered,” “wanted to know,” and “inquired.”
• The choice of verb depends on the context and the speaker’s tone.
• For example, “asked” is a neutral verb, while “wondered” suggests curiosity or uncertainty.

Remove the question mark (?) from the direct interrogative and add a full stop (.) in the reported sentence.  

Place modal verbs like “could,” “might,” “should,” and “would” instead of “can,” “may,” “should,” and “will” in indirect speech.

Use appropriate phrases like “I think,” “I believe,” “I suppose,” and “I wonder” to express uncertainty in indirect speech.

Use “if/whether” to introduce indirect/yes/no questions.  

• When reporting questions begin with “ who ,” “ what ,” “ when ,” “ where ,” “ why ,” or “ how ,” use “ if ” or “ whether ” to introduce the indirect question.
• If: Use “if” for questions that seek information or express uncertainty.
• Whether: Use “whether” for questions that seek a choice or confirmation.

Convert the direct interrogative sentence (Wh-question) into a statement structure.

• Direct interrogative sentences have a subject-verb-object order.
• The sentence structure is changed to a statement form when converting to reported speech.
• The subject and verb tense remain the same, but the interrogative tone is removed.

Here are some more examples of Reported Speech Interrogative you can take a look at before practising the exercises:

Direct : I said to him, “Where are you going?” Indirect : Tasked him where he was going.

Direct : He said to me, “Will you go there?” Indirect : He asked me if I would go there.

Direct : My friend said to Deepak, “Have you ever been to Agra?” Indirect : My friend asked Deepak if he had ever been to Agra.

Also Check: 50 Examples of Direct and Indirect Speech Exercises

Now the time comes to finally analyse your learning of Reported Speech Interrogative with us so far. Take your time to solve these exercises and check how many you got right from the answers below. 

Q1. Convert the following direct interrogative sentences into reported speech using the correct reporting verbs.

• “Have you already seen the new movie?”
• “Could you tell me the way to the nearest post office?”
• “Do you think it’s going to rain tonight?”
• “Can you please help me carry this heavy bag?”
• “Are you sure you know what you’re doing?”
• “When will the train arrive at the station?”
• “Why didn’t you tell me you were going to be late?”
• “What time does the store close today?”
• “Would you mind passing me the salt?”
•  “Do you think you could lend me your car for the weekend?”

Q2. Convert the following reported speech interrogative sentences into direct speech .

• She asked if I had finished my homework.
• He inquired if I could help him with his computer problem.
• She wondered if I knew the answer to the question.
• He asked if I was interested in going to the movies with him.
• She asked if I could give her a ride to the airport.
• He enquired if I had heard the latest news about the election.
• She wondered if I had any plans for the weekend.
• He asked if I thought it would be a good idea to go out for dinner.
• She asked if I could lend her her favourite book.
• He enquired if I could give him some feedback on his new song.

 Answer Key 1:

• Reported Speech: She asked if I had already seen the new movie.
• Reported Speech: He enquired if I could tell him the way to the nearest post office.
• Reported Speech: She wondered if it was going to rain that night.
• Reported Speech: He asked if I could help him carry that heavy bag.
• Reported Speech: She asked if I was sure I knew what I was doing.
• Reported Speech: He enquired when the train would arrive at the station.
• Reported Speech: She asked why I hadn’t told her I was going to be late.
• Reported Speech: He asked what time the store closed that day.
• Reported Speech: She asked if she could pass me the salt.
• Reported Speech: He asked if I thought he could lend him my car for the weekend.

Answer Key 2:

• Direct Speech: “Have you finished your homework?”
• Direct Speech: “Could you help me with my computer problem?”
• Direct Speech: “Do you know the answer to the question?”
• Direct Speech: “Are you interested in going to the movies with me?”
• Direct Speech: “Could you give me a ride to the airport?”
• Direct Speech: “Have you heard the latest news about the election?”
• Direct Speech: “Do you have any plans for the weekend?”
• Direct Speech: “Do you think it would be a good idea to go out for dinner?”
• Direct Speech: “Could you lend me your favourite book?”
• Direct Speech: “Could you give me some feedback on my new song?”

Explore More on Reported Speech

Explore More Blogs on Tenses

Interrogative journalism is a form where the main focus is on asking questions and seeking answers.

Reported Speech is when we tell someone what the other person said. Example: ‘I work in a bank, said James’ (Direct Speech) James said that he worked in a bank. (Indirect Speech)

Reported Speech is also known as Indirect speech.

This was all about the Reported Speech Interrogative rules and more. Hope you understand the concept and where it’s used. You can also follow Leverage Edu for more exciting and informative blogs.

Harshita is a creative writer cum literature enthusiast in pursuit to extend her learnings of overseas and Indian education sectors to the masses, through her well-curated articles. You may also find her emerging in prose writing or reading Toni Morrison when not writing stuff related to education.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

Reported Questions

Reported questions are one form of reported speech .

We usually introduce reported questions with the verb "ask":

• He asked (me) if / whether ... (YES/NO questions)
• He asked (me) why / when / where / what / how ... (question-word questions)

As with reported statements , we may need to change pronouns and tense (backshift) as well as time and place in reported questions.

But we also need to change the word order . After we report a question, it is no longer a question (and in writing there is no question mark). The word order is like that of a normal statement (subject-verb-object).

Reported YES/NO questions

We introduce reported YES/NO questions with ask + if :

Note that in the above example the reported question has no auxiliary "do". But there is pronoun change and backshift.

Note that we sometimes use "whether" instead of "if". The meaning is the same. "Whether" is a little more formal and more usual in writing:

• They asked us if we wanted lunch.
• They asked us whether we wanted lunch.

Reported question-word questions

We introduce reported question-word questions with ask + question word :

Note that in the above example the reported question has no auxiliary "do". But there is pronoun change and backshift.

• YES/NO questions: Do you want tea?
• Question Word questions: Where did you drink tea?
• Choice questions: Do you prefer tea or coffee?

Look at these example sentences:

Contributor: Josef Essberger

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Reported speech: indirect speech

Indirect speech focuses more on the content of what someone said rather than their exact words. In indirect speech , the structure of the reported clause depends on whether the speaker is reporting a statement, a question or a command.

Indirect speech: reporting statements

Indirect reports of statements consist of a reporting clause and a that -clause. We often omit that , especially in informal situations:

The pilot commented that the weather had been extremely bad as the plane came in to land. (The pilot’s words were: ‘The weather was extremely bad as the plane came in to land.’ )

I told my wife I didn’t want a party on my 50th birthday. ( that -clause without that ) (or I told my wife that I didn’t want a party on my 50th birthday .)

Indirect speech: reporting questions

Reporting yes-no questions and alternative questions.

Indirect reports of yes-no questions and questions with or consist of a reporting clause and a reported clause introduced by if or whether . If is more common than whether . The reported clause is in statement form (subject + verb), not question form:

She asked if [S] [V] I was Scottish. (original yes-no question: ‘Are you Scottish?’ )

The waiter asked whether [S] we [V] wanted a table near the window. (original yes-no question: ‘Do you want a table near the window? )

He asked me if [S] [V] I had come by train or by bus. (original alternative question: ‘Did you come by train or by bus?’ )

Questions: yes-no questions ( Are you feeling cold? )

Reporting wh -questions

Indirect reports of wh -questions consist of a reporting clause, and a reported clause beginning with a wh -word ( who, what, when, where, why, how ). We don’t use a question mark:

He asked me what I wanted.

Not: He asked me what I wanted?

The reported clause is in statement form (subject + verb), not question form:

She wanted to know who [S] we [V] had invited to the party.

Not: … who had we invited …

Who , whom and what

In indirect questions with who, whom and what , the wh- word may be the subject or the object of the reported clause:

I asked them who came to meet them at the airport. ( who is the subject of came ; original question: ‘Who came to meet you at the airport?’ )

He wondered what the repairs would cost. ( what is the object of cost ; original question: ‘What will the repairs cost?’ )

She asked us what [S] we [V] were doing . (original question: ‘What are you doing?’ )

Not: She asked us what were we doing?

When , where , why and how

We also use statement word order (subject + verb) with when , where, why and how :

I asked her when [S] it [V] had happened (original question: ‘When did it happen?’ ).

Not: I asked her when had it happened?

I asked her where [S] the bus station [V] was . (original question: ‘Where is the bus station?’ )

Not: I asked her where was the bus station?

The teacher asked them how [S] they [V] wanted to do the activity . (original question: ‘How do you want to do the activity?’ )

Not: The teacher asked them how did they want to do the activity?

Questions: wh- questions

Indirect speech: reporting commands

Indirect reports of commands consist of a reporting clause, and a reported clause beginning with a to -infinitive:

The General ordered the troops to advance . (original command: ‘Advance!’ )

The chairperson told him to sit down and to stop interrupting . (original command: ‘Sit down and stop interrupting!’ )

We also use a to -infinitive clause in indirect reports with other verbs that mean wanting or getting people to do something, for example, advise, encourage, warn :

They advised me to wait till the following day. (original statement: ‘You should wait till the following day.’ )

The guard warned us not to enter the area. (original statement: ‘You must not enter the area.’ )

Verbs followed by a to -infinitive

Indirect speech: present simple reporting verb

We can use the reporting verb in the present simple in indirect speech if the original words are still true or relevant at the time of reporting, or if the report is of something someone often says or repeats:

Sheila says they’re closing the motorway tomorrow for repairs.

Henry tells me he’s thinking of getting married next year.

Rupert says dogs shouldn’t be allowed on the beach. (Rupert probably often repeats this statement.)

Newspaper headlines

We often use the present simple in newspaper headlines. It makes the reported speech more dramatic:

JUDGE TELLS REPORTER TO LEAVE COURTROOM

PRIME MINISTER SAYS FAMILIES ARE TOP PRIORITY IN TAX REFORM

Present simple ( I work )

Reported speech

Reported speech: direct speech

Indirect speech: past continuous reporting verb

In indirect speech, we can use the past continuous form of the reporting verb (usually say or tell ). This happens mostly in conversation, when the speaker wants to focus on the content of the report, usually because it is interesting news or important information, or because it is a new topic in the conversation:

Rory was telling me the big cinema in James Street is going to close down. Is that true?

Alex was saying that book sales have gone up a lot this year thanks to the Internet.

‘Backshift’ refers to the changes we make to the original verbs in indirect speech because time has passed between the moment of speaking and the time of the report.

In these examples, the present ( am ) has become the past ( was ), the future ( will ) has become the future-in-the-past ( would ) and the past ( happened ) has become the past perfect ( had happened ). The tenses have ‘shifted’ or ‘moved back’ in time.

The past perfect does not shift back; it stays the same:

Modal verbs

Some, but not all, modal verbs ‘shift back’ in time and change in indirect speech.

We can use a perfect form with have + - ed form after modal verbs, especially where the report looks back to a hypothetical event in the past:

He said the noise might have been the postman delivering letters. (original statement: ‘The noise might be the postman delivering letters.’ )

He said he would have helped us if we’d needed a volunteer. (original statement: ‘I’ll help you if you need a volunteer’ or ‘I’d help you if you needed a volunteer.’ )

Used to and ought to do not change in indirect speech:

She said she used to live in Oxford. (original statement: ‘I used to live in Oxford.’ )

The guard warned us that we ought to leave immediately. (original statement: ‘You ought to leave immediately.’ )

No backshift

We don’t need to change the tense in indirect speech if what a person said is still true or relevant or has not happened yet. This often happens when someone talks about the future, or when someone uses the present simple, present continuous or present perfect in their original words:

He told me his brother works for an Italian company. (It is still true that his brother works for an Italian company.)

She said she ’s getting married next year. (For the speakers, the time at the moment of speaking is ‘this year’.)

He said he ’s finished painting the door. (He probably said it just a short time ago.)

She promised she ’ll help us. (The promise applies to the future.)

Indirect speech: changes to pronouns

Changes to personal pronouns in indirect reports depend on whether the person reporting the speech and the person(s) who said the original words are the same or different.

Indirect speech: changes to adverbs and demonstratives

We often change demonstratives ( this, that ) and adverbs of time and place ( now, here, today , etc.) because indirect speech happens at a later time than the original speech, and perhaps in a different place.

Typical changes to demonstratives, adverbs and adverbial expressions

Indirect speech: typical errors.

The word order in indirect reports of wh- questions is the same as statement word order (subject + verb), not question word order:

She always asks me where [S] [V] I am going .

Not: She always asks me where am I going .

We don’t use a question mark when reporting wh- questions:

I asked him what he was doing.

Not: I asked him what he was doing?

Word of the Day

not a living soul

Hidden in plain sight: words and phrases connected with hiding

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists

To add ${headword} to a word list please sign up or log in.

Add ${headword} to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

• English Grammar
• Clause structure and verb patterns

Reported speech

Level: intermediate

Reporting and summarising

When we want to report what people say, we don't usually try to report their exact words. We usually give a  summary , for example:

Direct speech (exact words) :

Mary :  Oh dear. We've been walking for hours! I'm exhausted. I don't think I can go any further. I really need to stop for a rest. Peter :  Don't worry. I'm not surprised you're tired. I'm tired too. I'll tell you what, let's see if we can find a place to sit down, and then we can stop and have our picnic.

Reported speech (summary) :

When Mary complained that she was tired out after walking so far, Peter said they could stop for a picnic.

Reporting verbs

When we want to report what people say, we use reporting verbs . Different reporting verbs have different patterns, for example:

Mary complained (that) she was tired . (verb + that clause) She asked if they could stop for a rest . (verb + if clause) Peter told her not to worry . (verb + to -infinitive) He suggested stopping and having a picnic . (verb + - ing form) 

See reporting verbs with that , wh-  and if clauses , verbs followed by the infinitive , verbs followed by the -ing form .

GapFillDragAndDrop_MTY1NTE=

GapFillTyping_MTY1NTI=

Tenses in reported speech

When reporting what people say or think in English, we need to remember that the rules for tense forms in reported speech are exactly the same as in the rest of the language.

This is a letter that Andrew wrote ten years ago:

If we wanted to report what Andrew said in his letter, we might say something like this: 

Andrew said that when he  was  22, he was an engineering student in his last month at university. He wanted  to travel abroad after he  had finished  his course at the university, but he would need to earn some money while he was abroad so he wanted  to learn to teach English as a foreign language. A friend  had recommended  a course but Andrew needed more information, so he wrote to the school and asked them when their courses started  and how much they were . He also wanted to know if there was  an examination at the end of the course.

We would naturally use past tense forms to talk about things which happened ten years ago. So, tenses in reports and summaries in English are the same as in the rest of the language.

Sometimes we can choose between a past tense form and a  present tense  form. If we're talking about the past but we mention something that's still true , we can use the present tense:

John said he'd stayed at the Shangri-la because it' s the best hotel in town. Mary said she enjoyed the film because Robert de Niro is her favourite actor. Helen said she  loves visiting New York.

or the past tense:

John said he'd stayed at the Shangri-la because it was the best hotel in town. Mary said she enjoyed the film because Robert de Niro was her favourite actor. Helen said she  loved visiting New York.

If we're talking about something that  everybody knows is true , we normally use the present tense :

Michael said he'd always wanted to climb Everest because it' s the highest mountain in the world. Mary said she loved visiting New York because it' s such an exciting city.

Hi! I found the following paragraph from a grammar site while I was studying the reported speech. Can you help me? It says; --> We can use a perfect form with have + -ed form after modal verbs, especially where the report looks back to a hypothetical event in the past: He said the noise might have been the postman delivering letters. (original statement: ‘The noise might be the postman delivering letters.’)

And my question is: How do we understand if it is a hypothetical event in the past or not? We normally don't change 'might' in reported speech. (e.g. ‘It might snow tonight,’ he warned. --> He warned that it might snow that night.) But why do we say 'He said the noise might have been the postman delivering letters.' instead of 'He said that the noise might be the postman delivering letters.’ What's the difference between these two indirect reported speeches? Could you please explain the difference? And I also found this example which is about the same rule above: --> He said he would have helped us if we’d needed a volunteer. (original statement: a) ‘I’ll help you if you need a volunteer’ or b) ‘I’d help you if you needed a volunteer.’) Can you also explain why we report this sentence like that. How can we both change a) and b) into the same indirect reported speech? Thank you very much!

• Log in or register to post comments

Hello Melis_06,

1. He said the noise might have been the postman delivering letters. 2. He said that the noise might be the postman delivering letters.

In sentence 1 it is clear that the noise has ended; it is a noise that 'he' could hear but it is not a noise that you can hear now. In sentence 2 the noise could have ended or it could be a noise that you can still hear now. For example, if the noise is one which is constant, such as a noise that comes from your car engine that you are still trying to identify, then you would use sentence 2. In other words, sentence 2 allows for a wider range of time possibilities - both past (ended) and present (still current).

Your second question is similar:

He said he would have helped us if we needed a volunteer - you no longer need a volunteer

He said he would help us if we needed a volunteer - this could still be relevant; you may still need a volunteer.

The LearnEnglish Team

Hello my friend : what are you doing now? me : I'm eating an apple now and My friend repeated his question now

my question

Can I repeat the sentence in the past ( I was eating an apple) and mean( I'm eating an apple now) ?

You can but it is unusual. If you say  I was eating an apple  (past continuous), it means that it was in the past. You already finished eating the apple and you are not eating it now. But if your friend asked you just a moment ago, I guess you are still eating the apple when she/he asks the second question, so I would say  I'm eating an apple  (because you are still doing it).

Alternatively, you can use a past tense reporting verb e.g. I said I was eating an apple  (referring to the time of the first question), or  I said I 'm eating an apple  (to show that you are still eating it now, at the moment of speaking).

LearnEnglish team

Am I correct then? When someone wants us to repeat the sentence we have just said a moment ago we say 'I said I am doing...' if we are still doing that action. But if we are done with that action, then we say 'I said I was doing...' Did I get it right? Thanks!

Hello Meldo,

Yes, that's correct. Well done!

Hi. I wish to enquire if the verb tense used after a conjunction also changes in complex sentences as per tense transition rules, especially if it is already in simple past tense. In order to explain, could you please solve the following for me: 1. It has been quite a while since I last saw you. 2. Nevertheless, she has been quite desensitized to such perverse actions to the extent that it seldom ever seems obnoxious to her. 3. Let me keep this in my cupboard lest I misplace this. 4. I had arrived at the station before you even left your house. 5. I met my grandfather before he died.

Hi Aamna bluemoon,

The verb may or may not be backshifted, depending on whether the original speaker's point of view and the reporter's point of view are the same or not. For example:

• She said it had been quite a while since she last saw me . (it seems relatively recent, for both the original speaker and the reporter)
• She said it had been quite a while since she had last seen us . (a lot of time has passed between speaking and reporting this, or the situation has changed a lot since then e.g. they have met frequently since then)
• She said she had met her grandfather before he died . (seems quite recent)
• She said she had met her grandfather before he'd died . (a lot of time has passed between speaking and reporting this)

I hope that helps.

Hi, can you help me, please? How could I report this famous quotation: 'There's no such things as good news in America'.

Hi bri.q630,

First of all, the sentence is not grammatically correct. The phrase is 'no such thing' (singular), not 'things'.

How you report it depends. Using 'said' as the reporting verb we have two possibilities:

1. They said (that) there's no such thing as good news in America. 2. They said (that) there was no such thing as good news in America.

Sentence 2 tells that only about the time when 'they' said it. It does not tell us if it is still true or not.

Sentence 1 tells us that what 'they' said is still relevant today. In other words there was no good news (in their opinion) when they spoke, and there is still no good news now.

Thank you Peter,

All things are getting clear to me.

So, you mean, I can use both sentences depending on what I want to indicate, can't I?

then the possible indications are bellow, are those correct?

1-a I remembered the World War 2 ended in 1945. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.)

1-b I remembered the World War 2 had ended in 1945. (This would be indicated I might missunderstand.)

2-a I felt time is money. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.)

2-b I felf time was money. (This would be indicated I might not feel any more.)

3-a I knew the sun rises in the east. (This would be indicated the statement is still true.)

3-b I knew the sun rase in the east. (This would be indicated I might misunderstand or forget.)

4-a I guessed* that Darth Vader is Luke's father. (This would be indicated I still believe he is.*sorry for the typo)

4-2 I guessed that Darth Vader was Luke's father. (This would be indicated I might know he is not.)

Thank you in advance.

Hello again Nobori,

1-a I remembered the World War 2 ended in 1945. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.) 1-b I remembered the World War 2 had ended in 1945. (This would be indicated I might missunderstand.)

Both forms are possible here. The 'ending' is a moment in the past; after this there is no war. By the way, we treat 'World War 2' as a name so there is no article before it.

2-a I felt time is money. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.) 2-b I felf time was money. (This would be indicated I might not feel any more.)

That's correct. Remember that backshifting the verb does not mean something is no longer true; it simply does not tell us anything about the present. Here, it tells the reader how you felt at a given moment in time; you may 

3-a I knew the sun rises in the east. (This would be indicated the statement is still true.) 3-b I knew the sun rase in the east. (This would be indicated I might misunderstand or forget.)

That's also correct. Again, remember that backshifting the verb does not mean something is no longer true; it simply does not tell us anything about the present.

4-a I guessed* that Darth Vader is Luke's father. (This would be indicated I still believe he is.*sorry for the typo) 4-2 I guessed that Darth Vader was Luke's father. (This would be indicated I might know he is not.)

Again, correct. In the second example it might still be true that he is Luke's father, or it might have turned out to be not true. The sentence does not tell us.

Hi Peter, Thank you for your thoughtful answer. Allthing is now very clear to me. Best

Hi, I am translating a fiction novel into English and need your help regarding the reporting speech as for few things I am not getting any clear understanding over the internet. As you know in fiction, we need to write in non-ordinary way to create unique impressions of the word and academic writing is different than speaking. Will be grateful if you could give your insight below, especially considering in the context of fiction/academic writing.

1) Let’s say If someone is giving a speech or presentation, I want to mix their speech, indirect-direct and past tense- present tense. Below are three examples:

-He said, their company makes excellent profit every year OR their company made excellent profit every year ( can both be correct? As the sentence)

- Roger had given his speech yesterday. He said, their company makes excellent profit every year and your company will sustain for next hundred years.(Can YOUR be used in the sentence)

- Roger said people wants to feel important OR Roger said people wanted to feel important (which will be correct as this is a trait which is true in past and present)

2) He thought why he is talking to her OR He thought why he was talking to her (are both write? As usually I see in novels the second example with WAS)

3) Gia was sitting with Jake and she told him she had met with her last year. Her mother had taken her to the dinner. Her mother had told her about her future plans. Her mother also had paid the bill for the dinner. (Do I need to use every time past perfect in this example though it doesn’t feel natural? As a rule of thumb I think past perfect needs to be used when we talk about another past event in the past )

Hello Alamgir3,

We're happy to help with a few specific grammar questions, but I'm afraid we can't help you with your translation -- I'd suggest you find an editor for that.

1) In the second clause, you can use present or past. We often use the present when it's still true now, but the past is not wrong. FYI we don't normally use a comma after 'said' in reported speech.

2) 'Why was he talking to her?' he thought.

3) This is really more of a question of style than grammar. Here I would suggest doing something like combining the four sentences into two and then leaving out 'had' in the second verb in each sentence. Even if it isn't written, it's understood to be past perfect.

All the best, Kirk LearnEnglish team

Hello teachers, I'm sorry, I could not find where to new post. Could you tell me about the back-sifting of thoughts bellow? Which forms are correct?

1-a I remembered the World War 2 ended in 1945. 1-b I remembered the World War 2 had ended in 1945.

2-a I felt time is money. 2-b I felf time was money.

3-a I knew the sun rises in the east. 3-b I knew the sun rase in the east.

4-a I guess that Darth Vader is Luke's father. 4-2 I guessed that Darth Vader was Luke's father.

Do those questions have the same conclusion as indirect speech, such as say and tell?

Hello Nobori,

The verb form remains the same when we want to make it clear that the situation described by the verb is still true, and this works in the same way as indirect speech. For example:

She said she loves me. [she loved me then and she loves me still] She said she loved me. [she loved me then; no information on how she feels now]

Other than this rule, the choice is really contextual and stylistic (up to the speaker). Sometimes a choice implies something. For example, the saying 'time is money' is a general statement, so if you choose to backshift here the listener will know it is an intentional choice and suspect that something has changed (you no longer believe it).

Hi teachers, I've read almost the section of comments below and my summarize is the present tense only can be used if the statement is still true now and past simple only tells the statement was true in the past and doesn't tell the statement is true or not now. Just to make sure, I wanna ask, If I'm not sure whether the statement is still true or not now, can I choose backshift instead (this is still apply to past tense become past perfect)? Thank you

Hello rahmanagustiansyah,

It sounds to me as if you've got the right general idea. Could you please give a couple of example sentences that illustrate your question?

Thanks in advance, Kirk The LearnEnglish Team

For example, Steve said "Anna hates you." Then I wanna tell about that to my friend, but I'm not sure whether Anna still hates me or not now. What should I choose between these two options. Answer 1:Steve said Anna hates me or Answer 2 : Steve said Anna hated me. Thank you

Hi rahmanagustiansyah,

In that case, I would choose answer 2. I might even add "... but I don't know if she still does" to the sentence to clarify, if that is the key point you want to communicate.

Jonathan The LearnEnglish Team

Hello Natasa Tanasa,

Both sentences are grammatically possible.

The first sentence is only possible if when the person asks the original question the woman is no longer there (she has already gone). The second sentence can be used in this situation too, or in a situation in which the woman was still there when the original question was asked. As the past tense is used in the original question ( Who was... ), both sentences are possible.

Hello Ahmed Imam,

When the situation is still true at the time of reporting, we can leave the verb form unchanged. For example:

1. She told me she loved me.

2. She told me she loves me.

In sentence 1 we know she loved me when she told me but we don't know whether or not she loves me now. In sentence 2, we know she loved me when she told me and we know that she loves me now.

In your example, if the supermarket is still in the same place then we can use either form. If the supermarket has been closed down or moved to another location then we need to use was .

As for which is 'safer', you'll need to make your own mind up! Keeping the verb in the same form carries more specific information and that may be appropriate or even important.

Hello eugelatina87,

I'll give you a hint: a verb is missing from the question.

Does that help you complete it?

All the best,

The first two sentences are possible and they can both mean that he is still Mary's boyfriend now. The first one makes this more clear, but the second one doesn't only refer to the past.

Hello magnuslin

Regarding your first question, the most common way of saying it is the second one. In some very specific situation, perhaps the first option would be possible.

This also answers your second question. It is not necessary to always backshift using the tenses you mention.

As for your third question, no, it is not necessary. In fact, it is probably more common to use the past simple in the reported speech as well. 

All the best

Hello manu,

Both forms are possible. If you use  had been  then we understand that he was there earlier but not when he said it - in other words, when he said it he had already left. If you use was then he may have left at the time of speaking, or he may have still been there.

Hello _princess_

I would recommend using answer a) because this is the general pattern used in reported speech. Sometimes the verb in the reported clause can be in the present tense when we are speaking about a situation that is still true, but the reported verb in the past tense can also have the same meaning. Since here the time referred to could be either past or present, I'd recommend using the past form.

Hello mwright,

This is an example of an indirect question. An indirect question reports a question, but is not a question itself, which is why we do not use a question mark at the end. Since it is not a question, we use the normal word order without inversion or auxiliary verbs. For example:

Indicative: He lives in Rome. Interrogative: Does he live in Rome? (Where does he live?) Reported: She asked if he lives in Rome. (She asked where he lives.)  

Hello ahlinthit

There are different styles of punctuating direct speech -- in other words, you might find other sources that will disagree with me -- but what I would use here is something different: "The boss is dead!" said the doctor.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes

Hello Timmosky,

The form that comes after the auxiliary verb 'do' (or 'does' or 'did') is not the plural present simple verb, but rather the bare infinitive (also known as 'base form' or 'first form') of the verb. Does that make sense?

All the best, Kirk The LearnEnglish Team

Hello sky-high,

This is very formal language. The phrase 'to the effect that' means 'with the meaning that'. In this context it can be understood to mean 'with the result that'.

Best wishes,

The difference is quite logical. If we use 'said' then we are talking about a claim by Peter in the past which he may or may not still maintain. If we use 'says' then we are talking about an opinion expressed by Peter which he still holds.

The reported information (whether or not Rooney is in good shape) can refer to only the past or to the present as well and the statement (what Peter thinks) can separately refer to only the past or the present as well. Of course, all of this is from the point of view of the person reporting Peter's opinion, and whether or not they think that Peter still thinks now what he thought then.

Both are possible. If you use the present tense then it is clear that the statement is still true (i.e. the business was not growing when Mary spoke and is still not growing now). If you use the past tense then no information is given regarding the present (i.e. the business was growing when Mary spoke and may or may not be growing now).

Hello aseel aftab,

It should be 'if they had'. This is not from this page, is it? I don't see it anywhere here, but if I've missed it please let me know.

Online courses

Group and one-to-one classes with expert teachers.

Learn English in your own time, at your own pace.

One-to-one sessions focused on a personal plan.

Get the score you need with private and group classes.  

Reported Speech: Rules, Examples, Exceptions

👉 Quiz 1 / Quiz 2

Advanced Grammar Course

What is reported speech?

“Reported speech” is when we talk about what somebody else said – for example:

• Direct Speech: “I’ve been to London three times.”
• Reported Speech: She said she’d been to London three times.

There are a lot of tricky little details to remember, but don’t worry, I’ll explain them and we’ll see lots of examples. The lesson will have three parts – we’ll start by looking at statements in reported speech, and then we’ll learn about some exceptions to the rules, and finally we’ll cover reported questions, requests, and commands.

So much of English grammar – like this topic, reported speech – can be confusing, hard to understand, and even harder to use correctly. I can help you learn grammar easily and use it confidently inside my Advanced English Grammar Course.

In this course, I will make even the most difficult parts of English grammar clear to you – and there are lots of opportunities for you to practice!

Backshift of Verb Tenses in Reported Speech

When we use reported speech, we often change the verb tense backwards in time. This can be called “backshift.”

Here are some examples in different verb tenses:

Reported Speech (Part 1) Quiz

Exceptions to backshift in reported speech.

Now that you know some of the reported speech rules about backshift, let’s learn some exceptions.

There are two situations in which we do NOT need to change the verb tense.

No backshift needed when the situation is still true

For example, if someone says “I have three children” (direct speech) then we would say “He said he has three children” because the situation continues to be true.

If I tell you “I live in the United States” (direct speech) then you could tell someone else “She said she lives in the United States” (that’s reported speech) because it is still true.

When the situation is still true, then we don’t need to backshift the verb.

He said he HAS three children

But when the situation is NOT still true, then we DO need to backshift the verb.

Imagine your friend says, “I have a headache.”

• If you immediately go and talk to another friend, you could say, “She said she has a headache,” because the situation is still true
• If you’re talking about that conversation a month after it happened, then you would say, “She said she had a headache,” because it’s no longer true.

No backshift needed when the situation is still in the future

We also don’t need to backshift to the verb when somebody said something about the future, and the event is still in the future.

Here’s an example:

• On Monday, my friend said, “I ‘ll call you on Friday .”
• “She said she ‘ll call me on Friday”, because Friday is still in the future from now.
• It is also possible to say, “She said she ‘d (she would) call me on Friday.”
• Both of them are correct, so the backshift in this case is optional.

Let’s look at a different situation:

• On Monday, my friend said, “I ‘ll call you on Tuesday .”
• “She said she ‘d  call me on Tuesday.” I must backshift because the event is NOT still in the future.

Review: Reported Speech, Backshift, & Exceptions

Quick review:

• Normally in reported speech we backshift the verb, we put it in a verb tense that’s a little bit further in the past.
• when the situation is still true
• when the situation is still in the future

Reported Requests, Orders, and Questions

Those were the rules for reported statements, just regular sentences.

What about reported speech for questions, requests, and orders?

For reported requests, we use “asked (someone) to do something”:

• “Please make a copy of this report.” (direct speech)
• She asked me to make a copy of the report. (reported speech)

For reported orders, we use “told (someone) to do something:”

• “Go to the bank.” (direct speech)
• “He told me to go to the bank.” (reported speech)

The main verb stays in the infinitive with “to”:

• She asked me to make a copy of the report. She asked me  make  a copy of the report.
• He told me to go to the bank. He told me  go  to the bank.

For yes/no questions, we use “asked if” and “wanted to know if” in reported speech.

• “Are you coming to the party?” (direct)
• He asked if I was coming to the party. (reported)
• “Did you turn off the TV?” (direct)
• She wanted to know if I had turned off the TV.” (reported)

The main verb changes and back shifts according to the rules and exceptions we learned earlier.

Notice that we don’t use do/does/did in the reported question:

• She wanted to know did I turn off the TV.
• She wanted to know if I had turned off the TV.

For other questions that are not yes/no questions, we use asked/wanted to know (without “if”):

• “When was the company founded?” (direct)
• She asked when the company was founded.” (reported)
• “What kind of car do you drive?” (direct)
• He wanted to know what kind of car I drive. (reported)

Again, notice that we don’t use do/does/did in reported questions:

• “Where does he work?”
• She wanted to know  where does he work.
• She wanted to know where he works.

Also, in questions with the verb “to be,” the word order changes in the reported question:

• “Where were you born?” ([to be] + subject)
• He asked where I was born. (subject + [to be])
• He asked where was I born.

Reported Speech (Part 2) Quiz

Learn more about reported speech:

• Reported speech: Perfect English Grammar
• Reported speech: BJYU’s

If you want to take your English grammar to the next level, then my Advanced English Grammar Course is for you! It will help you master the details of the English language, with clear explanations of essential grammar topics, and lots of practice. I hope to see you inside!

I’ve got one last little exercise for you, and that is to write sentences using reported speech. Think about a conversation you’ve had in the past, and write about it – let’s see you put this into practice right away.

Master the details of English grammar:

More Espresso English Lessons:

About the author.

Shayna Oliveira

Shayna Oliveira is the founder of Espresso English, where you can improve your English fast - even if you don’t have much time to study. Millions of students are learning English from her clear, friendly, and practical lessons! Shayna is a CELTA-certified teacher with 10+ years of experience helping English learners become more fluent in her English courses.

Direct and Indirect Speech of Interrogative Sentences

Direct and Indirect Speech of Interrogative Sentences into statements, maintaining proper punctuation and grammatical rules has been discussed in the following. Explore how to use reporting verbs , change word order , and use appropriate tone to convey the meaning of the original question for the direct indirect speech of interrogative sentences.

Interrogative Sentence in English

An interrogative sentence is a type of sentence that asks a question and requires an answer. We form interrogative sentences by using an auxiliary verb and subject-verb inversion. For example:

• “Do you like pizza?”
• “What is your name?”
• “Where do you live?” etc.

We use these sentences to gather information, express curiosity, or initiate a conversation.

Direct and Indirect Speech of Interrogative Sentence

Interrogative sentences can be identified by their question structure and the use of question words such as “ what ,” “ when, ” “ where, ” “ why ,” “ who ,” “ whose, ” “ which, ” “ how ,” etc. Interrogative sentences can also be recognized by the use of question marks (?) at the end of the sentence.

(a) Basically, the reported speech in direct narration will be introduced with an auxiliary verb or wh-word. Such as,

• He said to me, “Are you ill?”
• You said to me, “Why have you failed?”

(b) The sentence is normally ended with a note of interrogation or (?). Such as,

• The teacher said to me, “Why are you late?”
• He said to me, “Have you done it?”

People also ask

Rules for direct to indirect speech of interrogative sentences.

Study the following rules on how to change direct speech to indirect speech of Interrogative sentences with proper reporting verbs, change word order, and punctuation marks.

Rule 1: Identification of Reported Speech in Direct Narration

The first thing to remember, find out which kind of sentence it is in the quotation mark or inverted commas under direct narration.

From the above example, it is noted that the sentence, ‘Are you ill?’, is in the quotation mark or inverted commas under the direct narration and it begins with a question mark. So, we can identify the sentence and it is an interrogative sentence.

Now, we have to introduce the rules fit to change direct speech to indirect speech of the interrogative sentence.

Direct: He said to me, ‘Will you go there?’

Indirect: He asked me if I would go there.

Direct: I said to him, ‘How did you enjoy the movie?’

Indirect: I asked him how he had enjoyed the movie.

Rule 2: Changes of Reporting Verb

In Indirect Narration, interrogative Verbs such as “ ask ”, “ enquire ”, “ demand ”, “ want to know ” etc are used as reporting Verbs before the reported Speech in place of simple verbs “ say ” or “ tell ”.

Direct: He said to me, ‘When will the down train arrive?’

Indirect: He inquired o f me when the down train would arrive.

Direct: I said to him, ‘Where is the post office?’

Indirect: I wanted to know where the post office was.

Rule 3: Interrogative sentences with Yes/No answers (non ‘wh-word’)

If the reported speech in Direct Narration is introduced by Verbs like “ be ”, “ have ”, “and do ”, or any other auxiliary Verbs like “ can ”, “ shall ”, or “ will ”, or (in a simpler way, the Questions that can be answered by Yes , or No ,) the connective “ if ”, “ whether ” is used after the reporting verb or object of the reporting verb in the Indirect Narration.

Direct: I asked him, ‘ Have you eaten the cake?’

Indirect: I asked him if/whether he had eaten the cake.

Direct: He asked the boy, ‘ Did you pass the exam?’

Indirect: He asked the boy if/whether he had passed the exam.

Rule 4: Interrogative sentences with ‘wh-word’

If the Reported Speech in Direct Narration is introduced by interrogative pronouns ( who , which ) interrogative adjectives ( what , how much ), or interrogative adverbs ( why, when, where, how ), we can not use the conjunction if ( or whether ). Instead, the Wh-Word with which the reported speech of direct narration begins replaces the ‘ if’ or ‘ whether ‘ by that Wh-Word in indirect narration .

Direct: I said to him, ‘ When will you do it?’

Indirect: I asked him when he would do it.

Direct: He said to her, ‘ What is your name?’

Indirect: He asked her what her name was.

Direct: He said to her, ‘ Whose type-writer are you using?’

Indirect: He inquired of her whose type-writer she was using.

Direct: Father said, ‘ Where have you been so long in the sun, my son?’

Indirect: Father inquired of the son where he had been so long in the sun.

Direct: The king said, ‘ Who is not ready to die for his land, my countrymen?’

Indirect: The king asked his countrymen who were not ready to die for his land.

Rule 5: Change of Punctuation Mark in Indirect speech of Interrogative sentence.

We have to change The Interrogative Form of the Reported Speech in Direct Narration into a Statement or Assertive Sentence in Indirect Narration . At the end of the sentence of Indirect Narration, we must use a full stop ( . ) instead of a question mark ( ? ). So, in Indirect Narration, the Reported Speech will start with the Subject, then the Verb, and then others.

Direct: He said to me, ‘Did you write to me before ?’

Indirect: He asked me if I had written to him before .

Direct: He said to you, ‘Can you tell me your address?’

Indirect: He asked you if you could tell him your address.

Direct: She said to him, ‘Will you help me lift this luggage?’

Indirect: She asked him if he would help her lift that luggage.

Rule 6: Interrogative Sentences with Modals in Indirect Speech

An Interrogative Sentence beginning with “ Shal l” in the Direct Narration, takes the form “ would ” in the Past Tense in the Indirect Narration. We use “should” only when the statement is a Polite question or involves or implies a matter of propriety or duty.

Direct: He said to me, ‘ Shall we reach the village before dawn ?’

Indirect: He asked me if they would reach the village before dawn .

Direct: They said, ‘ Shall we contribute to the Poor Fund?’

Indirect: They asked if they should contribute to the Poor Fund. [ polite question ]

Direct: Ridhi said to me, ‘Could I be of any help to you?’

Indirect: Ridhi asked me if I could be of any help to her.

Rule 7: Direct to Indirect Speech with Tag Questions

Sentence with Question Tags: Sometimes an Interrogative sentence is formed in the Direct Narration by adding some Interrogative Tags to an Assertive sentence.

In Indirect Narration, the tag is omitted after the meaning of the sentence(Affirmation or Negation) has been guessed from it. Sometimes different verbs such as “ think ”, “ hope ”, “ believe ”, and “ ask ” may be used to express that idea in an Indirect Form.

Direct: Robert said, ‘John is a good boy, isn’t it ?’

Indirect: Robert said that he thought that John was a good boy .

Direct: Robin said, ‘The captain did not agree to go, did he?’

Indirect: Robin said that believed that the captain had not agreed to go.

Direct: The teacher said to the boy, ‘You will do the job, won’t you?’

Indirect: The teacher told the boy that he hoped he (the boy) would do the job.

Direct: He said, ‘You are going to market, aren’t you?’

Indirect: He asked me if it was true that I was going to market.

Rule 8: Changes in Persons for Interrogative Sentences

Get the rules on how to make Changes in Persons in indirect narration on the previous page under the General Rules section.

Rule 9: Change the Tense of Reporting Verb for Interrogative Sentences

Study the rules to change the tense of the Reporting Verb in Indirect Narration and the Verb of the reported speech in indirect narration by going to the above link which is the General Rules section on the previous page.

Some Work Out Examples: Interrogative Sentences Direct Indirect Speech:

Note carefully the Changes in Interrogative Sentences from Direct Speech to Indirect Speech.

Direct: I said to the boy, “Did you go to school?”

Indirect: I asked (enquired of) the boy if he had gone to school.

Direct: “Is not poverty a curse?” my father said to me.

Indirect: My father asked me if poverty was (is) not a curse.

Direct: “Are you weeping?” he asked her.

Indirect: He asked her if she was weeping.

Direct: “Have you brought a pen for me?” the girl said to her father.

Indirect: The girl asked her father if he had brought a pen for her.

Direct: “Can you see a woman seated at a table?” he asked her.

Indirect: He asked her if she could see a woman seated at a table.

Direct: Persome said, “Marie, isn’t the soup boiling yet?”

Indirect: Persome asked Marie if the soup was not boiling by that time.

Direct: “Would you sing for our visitors?” my mother said to my sister.

Indirect: My mother asked my sister if she would sing for our visitors.

Direct: He said to me, “What are you doing ?”

Indirect: He asked me what I was doing.

Direct: He said to me, “When will you go home ?”

Indirect: He enquired of me when I would go home.

Direct: You said to me, “Why have you failed ?”

Indirect: You asked me why I had failed.

Direct: He said to me, “Who has gone to the sea ?”

Indirect: He asked me who had gone to the sea.

Exam Questions Answers 2023:

Direct: Reba said, “Which book is mine ?”

Indirect: Reba asked which book was hers.

Direct: He said to me, “When will the down train arrive ?”

Indirect: He inquired of me when the down train would arrive.

Direct: Mina said, “Why must I stay ?”

Indirect: Mina asked why she must stay.

Direct: He said, “Where is the post office?”

Indirect: He wanted to know where the post office was.

Direct: He said, “How will the Sherpa climb the peak ?”

Indirect: He wondered how the Sherpa would climb the peak.

Direct: She said to me, “Maya can’t speak Hindi, can she”?

Indirect: She told me that she didn’t think Maya could speak Hindi.

Direct: Amal said, “They will not go, will they”?

Indirect: Amal hoped they would not go.

Direct: He said to me, “You are going to the playground, aren’t you?”

Indirect: He asked me whether it was true that I was going to the playground.

Solved Worksheet

Change the following sentences from Direct to Indirect Speech:

1. Ram said to his friends, “Do you want to go to Kolkata with me ?”

2.”Shall we send it to your flat ?” he said.

3. Rina said to Samir, “Are you going today ?”

4. Pradeep said to me, “When will you go home ?”

5. “Whom do you want ?” he said to her.

6. He said to Rita “How is your father ?”

7. “Who told you about my success ?” she said to her friend.

8. The lady said to the man, “May I park my car here ?”

9. “Who has dared to wound you ?” cried the Giant.

10. The workers said to the manager, “When do you like to talk to us ?”

11. The poor woman said, “Will none of you help me today ?”

12. “Can you find your way home ? said I to the little boy.

13. “Which way did you see the thief go ?” asked the policeman.

14. He said to the girl, “Don’t you know my sister ?”

Report the following into Indirect Speech

Turn the following sentences from Direct to Indirect Speech

1. “Have you anything to say on behalf of the prisoner ?”. said the judge to the lawyers.

2. The traveller said, “Are you really telling me the truth ?”

3. He said to the strangers, “Who are you ?”

4. Sanat said to Debu, “Where have you kept my pen ?”

5. She said to the boy, “What are you doing here ?”

6. He said, “What do you want ?”

7. He said to John, “Why are you shouting ?”

8. “Who is our master ?” asked William Tell.

9. Babu said to the stranger, “Who are you?”

10. Pompi said, “Which of the pens do you need ?”

11. “Where do you live”, he asked

Frequently asked questions

1. q: what is an example of direct and indirect speech of an interrogative sentence.

Ans: Interrogative sentence Direct Speech Example: I said to the boy, “Did you go to school?”

Interrogative sentence Indirect Speech Example: I asked (enquired of) the boy if he had gone to school.

2. Q: What is an example of an interrogative sentence indirect?

Ans: interrogative sentence indirect: My father asked me if poverty was (is) not a curse.

3. Q: What is an example of a direct speech for an interrogative sentence?

Ans: Interrogative sentence Direct Speech: “Is not poverty a curse?” my father said to me.

4. Q: What are 10 examples of interrogative?

What is your name? How old are you? Why have you done this? When will you go? Which shirt do you like? Whose car is this? Whom do you prefer most? Have you done this before? Did you notice that? Will he make it?

5. Q: What are the 7 interrogative words?

Ans: What, When, Who, Whose, Whom, How, Why.

Related Posts:

Reported Speech in English Grammar

Direct speech, changing the tense (backshift), no change of tenses, question sentences, demands/requests, expressions with who/what/how + infinitive, typical changes of time and place.

• Lingolia Plus English

Introduction

In English grammar, we use reported speech to say what another person has said. We can use their exact words with quotation marks , this is known as direct speech , or we can use indirect speech . In indirect speech , we change the tense and pronouns to show that some time has passed. Indirect speech is often introduced by a reporting verb or phrase such as ones below.

Learn the rules for writing indirect speech in English with Lingolia’s simple explanation. In the exercises, you can test your grammar skills.

When turning direct speech into indirect speech, we need to pay attention to the following points:

• changing the pronouns Example: He said, “ I saw a famous TV presenter.” He said (that) he had seen a famous TV presenter.
• changing the information about time and place (see the table at the end of this page) Example: He said, “I saw a famous TV presenter here yesterday .” He said (that) he had seen a famous TV presenter there the day before .
• changing the tense (backshift) Example: He said, “She was eating an ice-cream at the table where you are sitting .” He said (that) she had been eating an ice-cream at the table where I was sitting .

If the introductory clause is in the simple past (e.g. He said ), the tense has to be set back by one degree (see the table). The term for this in English is backshift .

The verbs could, should, would, might, must, needn’t, ought to, used to normally do not change.

If the introductory clause is in the simple present , however (e.g. He says ), then the tense remains unchanged, because the introductory clause already indicates that the statement is being immediately repeated (and not at a later point in time).

In some cases, however, we have to change the verb form.

When turning questions into indirect speech, we have to pay attention to the following points:

• As in a declarative sentence, we have to change the pronouns, the time and place information, and set the tense back ( backshift ).
• Instead of that , we use a question word. If there is no question word, we use whether / if instead. Example: She asked him, “ How often do you work?” → She asked him how often he worked. He asked me, “Do you know any famous people?” → He asked me if/whether I knew any famous people.
• We put the subject before the verb in question sentences. (The subject goes after the auxiliary verb in normal questions.) Example: I asked him, “ Have you met any famous people before?” → I asked him if/whether he had met any famous people before.
• We don’t use the auxiliary verb do for questions in indirect speech. Therefore, we sometimes have to conjugate the main verb (for third person singular or in the simple past ). Example: I asked him, “What do you want to tell me?” → I asked him what he wanted to tell me.
• We put the verb directly after who or what in subject questions. Example: I asked him, “ Who is sitting here?” → I asked him who was sitting there.

We don’t just use indirect questions to report what another person has asked. We also use them to ask questions in a very polite manner.

When turning demands and requests into indirect speech, we only need to change the pronouns and the time and place information. We don’t have to pay attention to the tenses – we simply use an infinitive .

If it is a negative demand, then in indirect speech we use not + infinitive .

To express what someone should or can do in reported speech, we leave out the subject and the modal verb and instead we use the construction who/what/where/how + infinitive.

Say or Tell?

The words say and tell are not interchangeable. say = say something tell = say something to someone

How good is your English?

Find out with Lingolia’s free grammar test

Take the test!

Maybe later

• Syllabus 2024-25
• CBSE Class X SQP 2023-24
• CBSE Class XII SQP 2023-24
• Class X SQP 2022-23
• Class XII SQP 2022-23
• Request Answers

Reported Speech: Practice Exercises in Interrogative Sentences

• Post last modified: 1 March 2023
• Post category: Grammar Exercises / School Grammar

Do practice converting Direct Speech Interrogative sentences into Indirect Speech. The exercises are based on both types of Questions – Starting with an Auxiliary Verb and the other type starting with a Q Word. Try to first attempt yourself then see the answers given in the last of every set of questions.

More exercises are added from time to time, so keep coming here 😊

Click here more English Grammar study materials

I – Interrogative Sentences – Yes/No Type (Questions starts with an auxiliary verb)

See some examples before attempting practice exercises.

Direct speech: “Are you the one who stole the money?”

Indirect speech: He asked if I was the one who had stolen the money.

Direct speech: “What are you doing here at this time?”

Indirect speech: She asked what I was doing there at that time.

Direct speech: “Have you ever been to Europe before?”

Indirect speech: He asked if I had ever been to Europe before.

Direct speech: “Who taught you how to play the guitar so well?”

Indirect speech: She asked me who had taught me how to play the guitar so well.

Direct speech: “Why did you leave your previous job?”

Indirect speech: He asked me why I had left my previous job.

Q. Change the following sentences into Indirect Speech.  

1. “Are there any more files?” He asked. “Yes, sir,” said the peon.  

2. The teacher said to Rena, “Did you break the window pane?” “No, sir,” said Reena, “I did not.” 

3. “If you find my answers satisfactory, will you give me five rupees?” said the astrologer. “No,” replied the customer.  

4. I said to him, “Do you want to go to Delhi?” He said, “No, sir.”  

5. Rahul said to me, “Does Mohit still play?” I said, “Yes, sir.”  

6. Malik said to her, “Has Sara invited you to dinner?”  

7. I said to her, “Did you enjoy the film?” She said, “No, sir.”  

8. Sachin said, “Sonam, do you see what I see?” Sonam said, “Yes.”  

9. He said, “Do you not like it?” She said, “Yes.”  

10. She said to me, “Shall we ever see each other again?” I said, “Perhaps, never.” 

1. He asked the peon if there were any more files. The peon replied respectfully in the affirmative.  

2. The teacher asked Reena if she had broken the window pane. Reena replied respectfully that she had not done it.  

3. The astrologer asked the customer if he would give him five rupees if he found his answers satisfactory. The customer replied in negative.  

4. I asked him if he wanted to go to Delhi and he replied respectfully in negative.  

5. Rahul asked me if Mohit still played and I replied respectfully in positive.  

6. Malik asked her if Sara had invited her to dinner.  

7. I asked her if she had enjoyed the film. She replied respectfully in negative.  

8. Sachin asked Sonam if she saw what he saw. She replied in affirmative.  

9. He asked if she did not like that and she replied in affirmative.  

10. She asked me if we would ever see each other again but I replied that we would perhaps never. 

II – Interrogative Sentences – Q. Word Type (Question begins with a Q. Word)

Q. change the following sentences into indirect speech.  .

1. He said to me, “Whom does she want to contact?”  

2. They said to her, “Whose house are you purchasing?”  

3. You said to him “Why are you making mischief?”  

4. They said to us, “How have you solved this sum?”  

5. We said to them, “Who has misguided you?”  

6. They said to him, “Where have you been wandering since yesterday?”  

7. She said to me, “Why were you hiding today?”  

8. Raja said to us, “When do you expect to see me again?”  

9. He said to her, “What shall I be offering you with tea?”  

10. We said to them, “When shall we have paid you a visit?” 

1. He asked me whom she wanted to contact.  

2. They asked her whose house she was purchasing.  

3. You asked him why he was making mischief.  

4. They asked us how we had solved that sum.  

5. We asked them who had misguided them.  

6. They asked him where he had been wandering since the previous day.  

7. She asked me why I had been hiding that day.  

8. Raja asked us when we expected to see him again.  

9. He asked her what he would be offering her with tea.

10. We asked them when we would have paid them a visit. 

Miscellaneous Exercises on Interrogative Sentences

I. change the following sentences into indirect speech..

• “What is your name?” asked the teacher. Indirect speech:
• “Where did you go yesterday?” she asked me. Indirect speech:
• “Are you feeling better now?” he asked her. Indirect speech: .
• “Will you come with me?” he asked her. Indirect speech: .
• “Why did you break the vase?” he asked his son. Indirect speech:
• “What are you doing here?” asked John.
• “Have you finished your homework?” the teacher asked.
• “Why did you leave the party so early?” she asked
• “Are you going to the concert tonight?” Tom asked.
• “Where did you put my phone?” asked Sarah.
• The teacher asked me what my name was.
• She asked me where I had gone the previous day.
• He asked her if she was feeling better then
• He asked her if she would go with him
• He asked his son why he had broken the vase.
• John asked what I was doing there.
• The teacher asked if I had finished my homework.
• She asked why I had left the party so early.
• Tom asked if I was going to the concert that night.
• Sarah asked where I had put her phone.

Contact for Paid Online Session to understand more or clear your doubts

Contact Ajeet Sir on Telegram , WhatsApp , Email

want to share! Share this content

• Opens in a new window

You Might Also Like

Modals: class 10 practice exercises, gap filling: cloze test exercises english grammar for school classes, active and passive voice practice questions cbse/icse english grammar, analytical paragraph writing english grammar cbse class 9 & 10, this post has 5 comments.

N Yashvanth 8th C

Sarman Rathore Rath Hamirpur Uttar pradesh

Cool…!!

Hi Safa, we have added a few more questions. You can also see and attempt them.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Narration Change of Interrogative Sentences

Back to: Direct and Indirect Speech (Narration)

Table of Contents

Introduction

Interrogative sentence poses question. This type of sentence is very much different from assertive sentence which makes a statement. In interrogative sentence predicate (verb) comes first, then comes the subject. In some cases the helping verb comes before the subject and the main verb remains behind to form question. The entire verb can also be placed before subject in some instances. 

Interrogative sentence are two types –

• WH – question.
• Yes-no question. 
• WH – question is formed with the use of who, which, when, where, how why.
• Yes-no question is formed with the use of auxiliary verbs such as – am, is, are, was, were, do, did, can, shall, will, have, has, may. 
• A question mark should always be used at the end of interrogative sentence in direct speech.
• To convert direct speech to indirect speech quotation marks should be omitted . 
• Ask is used as reporting verb instead of say, tell, say to. 
• In narration change, interrogative sentence changes to assertive form [direct to indirect speech]
• After the conversion of interrogative sentence from direct to indirect speech, the question mark changes to full stop.
• The conjunction ‘ that ’ is not used to connect reporting and reported clause.
• Instead ‘ if ’ or ‘ whether ’ is used for the conversion of yes-no question.
• ‘ If ’, ‘ whether’ , ‘ that ’ are not used in WH – questions. 

• Grammar Lessons
• Grammar Exercises
• Grammar Quizzes
• Mixed Tests
• PDF Worksheets
• Beginners Lessons
• Easy Worksheets
• Beginners Tests
• Reading Exercises
• Drag & Drop Grammar
• English For Kids
• Kids Word Games
• Picture Vocabulary
• Reading Tests
• Short Dialogues
• Short Sentences
• Closest in Meaning
• Irrelevant Sentence
• ESL Paragraphs
• GRE Reading
• Text Completion
• GRE Equivalence
• SAT Sentence
• Essay Writing
• Vocabulary Exercises
• Study Skills Tips
• Drag & Drop Vocab

Reported Speech Questions

Questions With Question Words

Yes/no questions (with helping verb).

Reported Speech (Indirect Speech)

Exercises on reported speech.

If we report what another person has said, we usually do not use the speaker’s exact words (direct speech), but reported (indirect) speech. Therefore, you need to learn how to transform direct speech into reported speech. The structure is a little different depending on whether you want to transform a statement, question or request.

When transforming statements, check whether you have to change:

• present tense verbs (3rd person singular)
• place and time expressions
• tenses (backshift)

→ more on statements in reported speech

When transforming questions, check whether you have to change:

Also note that you have to:

• transform the question into an indirect question
• use the interrogative or if / whether

→ more on questions in reported speech

→ more on requests in reported speech

Additional Information and Exeptions

Apart from the above mentioned basic rules, there are further aspects that you should keep in mind, for example:

• main clauses connected with and / but
• tense of the introductory clause
• reported speech for difficult tenses
• exeptions for backshift
• requests with must , should , ought to and let’s

→ more on additional information and exeptions in reported speech

Statements in Reported Speech

• no backshift – change of pronouns
• no backshift – change of pronouns and places
• with backshift
• with backshift and change of place and time expressions

Questions in Reported Speech

Requests in reported speech.

• Exercise 1 – requests (positive)
• Exercise 2 – requests (negative)
• Exercise 3 – requests (mixed)

Mixed Exercises on Reported Speech

• Exercise on reported speech with and without backshift

Grammar in Texts

• „ The Canterville Ghost “ (highlight direct speech and reported speech)

Reported Speech Exercises

Perfect english grammar.

Here's a list of all the reported speech exercises on this site:

( Click here to read the explanations about reported speech )

Reported Statements:

• Present Simple Reported Statement Exercise (quite easy) (in PDF here)
• Present Continuous Reported Statement Exercise (quite easy) (in PDF here)
• Past Simple Reported Statement Exercise (quite easy) (in PDF here)
• Present Perfect Reported Statement Exercise (quite easy) (in PDF here)
• Future Simple Reported Statement Exercise (quite easy) (in PDF here)
• Mixed Tense Reported Statement Exercise (intermediate) (in PDF here)
• 'Say' and 'Tell' (quite easy) (in PDF here)

Reported Questions:

• Present Simple Reported Yes/No Question Exercise (intermediate) (in PDF here)
• Present Simple Reported Wh Question Exercise (intermediate) (in PDF here)
• Mixed Tense Reported Question Exercise (intermediate) (in PDF here)

Reported Orders and Requests:

• Reported Requests and Orders Exercise (intermediate) (in PDF here)
• Reported Speech Mixed Exercise 1 (difficult) (in PDF here)
• Reported Speech Mixed Exercise 2 (difficult) (in PDF here)

Hello! I'm Seonaid! I'm here to help you understand grammar and speak correct, fluent English.

Read more about our learning method

• English Grammar
• Grammar Exercises
• Reported Speech Exercises For Class 10

Reported Speech Exercises with Answers for Class 10

One of the English grammar concepts that almost all of us would have studied in our junior classes is reported speech . Having a clear understanding of reported speech helps students use sentences correctly. This article provides reported speech exercises for class 10 students.

Reported Speech Exercises for Class 10 with Answers

Here is an exercise on the transformation of direct speech to indirect speech. Go through the following sentences, work them out and then check your answers to assess how far you have understood their usage.

Change as directed

Read the following sentences and change them into reported speech.

• Mimi said, “I have been writing this letter.”
• I said, “Sam’s driving the car.”
• My uncle said, “I am cooking lunch.”
• My brother said, “I had already eaten.”
• The old lady said to the girl, “Where do you come from?”
• Jon said, “I like to play rugby.”
• My mother said, “I get up early every morning.”
• The maths teacher said, “Three divided by three is one.”
• Mohit said, “Switzerland is a very beautiful country.”
• Ruben said, “It is very cold outside.”
• The teacher said, “The French Revolution took place in 1789.”
• Uma said, “I saw a Royal Bengal Tiger in the zoo.”
• Luke said, “I can do this homework.”
• Aswini said to her mother, “I have passed the test”.
• Daphne said to Antony, “I will go to London tomorrow.”
• The boy said, “My father is sleeping.”
• The traffic police said to us, “Where are you going?”
• The man shouted, “Let me go.”
• Shivina said, “Alas! I am lost.”
• “I know her contact number,” said Helena.
• Stefen said, “My granny is making pasta.”
• Raj said to Simran, “Have you ever been to the National Museum?”
• Anish said to Sid, “Please lend me the book.”
• The teacher said to the parents, “Shelly is working very hard.”
• Joshua said, “I have completed my assignment.”
• I said to Alka, “How long will you stay here?”
• The child told his dad, “I want an ice cream.”
• Meera said, “I am not feeling well.”
• The teacher said to Vivek, “Draw the diagram of the plant’s parts.”
• Irin said, “I am playing the piano.”
• My mother said to me, “Help me carry this bag.”
• Rahul said, “My sister is very helpful.”
• The news reporter said, “The flight will be delayed by a few hours due to heavy rains.”
• Urmi said to her mother, “I want a slice of pizza.”
• I said to Daniel, “Are you reading this book?”
• Mimi said that she had been writing that letter.
• I said that Sam was driving the car.
• My uncle said that he was cooking lunch.
• My brother said that he had already eaten.
• The old lady asked the girl where she came from.
• Jon said that he likes to play rugby.
• My mother said that she gets up early every morning.
• The maths teacher said that three divided by three is one.
• Mohit said that Switzerland was a very beautiful country.
• Ruben said that it was very cold outside.
• The teacher said that the French Revolution took place in 1789.
• Uma said that she saw a Royal Bengal Tiger in the zoo.
• Luke said that he could do that homework.
• Aswini told her mother that she had passed the test.
• Daphne informed Antony that she would go to London the next day.
• The boy said that his father was sleeping.
• The traffic police asked us where we were going.
• The man shouted to them to let him go.
• Shivina exclaimed sadly that she was lost.
• Helena said that she knew her contact number.
• Stefen said that his granny was making pasta.
• Raj asked Simran if she had ever been to the National Museum.
• Anish requested Sid to lend him the book.
• The teacher told the parents that Shelly was working very hard.
• Joshua said that he had completed his assignment.
• I asked Alka how long she would stay there.
• The child told his dad that he wants an ice cream.
• Meera said that she was not feeling well.
• The teacher instructed Vivek to draw the diagram of the plant’s parts.
• Irin said that she was playing the piano.
• My mother asked me to help her carry the bag.
• Rahul said that his sister was very helpful.
• The news reporter said that the flight would be delayed by a few hours due to heavy rains.
• Urmi said to her mother that she wanted a slice of pizza.
• I asked Daniel if he was reading that book.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is direct narration.

When the actual words/sentences spoken by the speaker are quoted in a speech, it is known as direct speech/narration.

Is knowing reported speech necessary for Class 10?

Having a basic understanding of reported speech is necessary for students of any class or age. Solving exercises on direct and indirect speech will help them understand thoroughly and use them correctly.

What is indirect speech?

When the quoted speech is reported in the form of a narrative without changing the meaning of the actual quotation/words by the speaker, it is called indirect speech. Indirect speech is also known as reported speech.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Ohio State faculty adviser: Student protest arrests show start of 'A wave of repression'

Two Ohio State University students were arrested Tuesday and charged with misdemeanor criminal trespassing during an on-campus demonstration.

Ohio State University police officers arrested the students at Meiling Hall, a classroom and administrative building near the Wexner Medical Center, according to police reports. About 60 individuals had gathered to protest the Hamas-Israel war in Gaza and fossil fuel divestment.

The Dispatch is not naming the students, as they have not been charged with a felony. One student, a sociology major, is a member of Ohio Youth for Climate Justice, and the other is a journalism major and a member of OSU's Students for Justice in Palestine chapter.

Police said the students "failed to leave the area and failed to stop disrupting" an event being held in the building's lobby.

I am no longer a proud Buckeye. Ohio State president using dog whistle to muzzle free speech

A video posted by student organizers shows a group of protesters gathered on the steps outside Meiling Hall wearing pro-Palestine shirts and chanting "Free Palestine." In the video, an OSU police officer walks down the steps, points at a student, turns back to give a thumbs up to other officers before three officers walked the individual up the steps and into custody.

Another video showed about a dozen police officers and university officials blocking the building's entrance and pushing a student after officers pulled the student inside the building's safety vestibule.

What happened at Tuesday's protest at Ohio State?

Isabella Guinigundo — an Ohio State fourth-year student and communications director of Ohio Youth for Climate Justice, a statewide organization that advocates for environmental justice — said the protest was organized by several groups. It was meant to be Ohio Youth for Climate Justice's last event of the semester.

Guinigundo said students initially gathered at Mirror Lake and were met by Office of Student Life employees and OSU police officers, who warned them that there would be "no tolerance for amplified noise" because it was Reading Day, a day on the academic calendar before exams begin for students to study. They were also told they could only chant outdoors, she said.

Guinigundo said the students chose not to use the megaphones and loud speakers they brought to comply with the rules. The group eventually marched to Meiling Hall, where the OSU Wexner Medical Center Board of Trustees' Quality and Professional Affairs committee was meeting.

The group held its own "People's Board Meeting" outside the building, Guinigundo said. At some point, she said police officers told the group it could be heard from inside the building's lobby. One was arrested shortly after the warning.

Ben Johnson, a university spokesman, said the students received "multiple warnings" before their arrest that they were being too loud. The two students who were arrested were individuals who "continued at the same volume" after being warned, he said.

"Well established university policy prohibits disrupting the university’s mission, administrative functions and campus-life activities. This includes demonstrations that disrupt classroom and administrative buildings," Johnson said.

Disruptive noise, according to the university's space rules, includes, but is not limited to: amplified sound, other loud noise that is audible more than 50 feet from the source of the sound and/or noise occurring during the restricted hours above.

Guinigundo said most protesters took a step back from the doors to regroup when police arrested another student.

Johnson said it was "only when warnings weren't heeded" that students were arrested.

"Ohio State has an unwavering commitment to freedom of speech and took this action in alignment with our space use rules to provide for the orderly conduct of university business," Johnson said.

Ohio State students, faculty say police 'wanted to make an example'

Sumaya Hamadmad, an Ohio State research scientist, attended the protest as a member of the Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine group. She said students complied with all rules given by university officials. They were so quiet at times, she said, she could barely hear what was being said to the group.

"You could hear more noise on a regular school day," she said. "This was meant to intimidate students."

Guinigundo agreed.

"OSUPD wanted to make an example out of our organizations," she said.

Pranav Jani, faculty adviser for Students for Justice in Palestine and an associate professor of English at Ohio State, said he believes "Ohio State has been laying the groundwork for these arrests for a long time."

"A wave of repression is starting, and we can expect it to get worse," he said.

Jani said Ohio State has suspended a student group, charged individual students under the university's code of conduct for nonviolent protests and "has basically accused students of inciting violence and hate." He said he's been in meetings with administrators and students for weeks, "and while private sympathies are expressed, actions and arrests speak louder than words."

Hamadmad said she is worried that universities calling police officers on their own students, like what is happening with student protesters at Columbia University , is setting dangerous precedent.

"Ohio State, like universities around the country, has failed to protect or even show basic empathy for their Palestinian and pro-Palestinian students and faculty, which include Muslim, Arab, Jewish, Christian and many others," Jani said. "It’s a damn shame."

Ohio State president said university will 'continue to prioritize safety'

The arrests come a day after Ohio State President Ted Carter said in an end-of-the-semester email that he respects students' right to freedom of speech, but "will not compromise" on matters of safety.

Ohio State will "continue to prioritize safety," Carter said in the email, including having university police officers and trained staff on-site for demonstrations, and enforcing space rules that prohibit "intentional disruptions of university events, classes, exams or programming, including commencement."

OSU's spring commencement is May 5 at Ohio Stadium.

Johnson said he is "cautiously optimistic that people will by and large be respectful" at protests as the semester draws to a close.

Guinigundo said protesters appreciate the support they've received, but she hopes people remember the reason they are protesting in the first place.

"Our hearts should be with Gaza," she said.

Sheridan Hendrix is a higher education reporter for The Columbus Dispatch. Sign up for Extra Credit, her education newsletter,  here .

[email protected]

@sheridan120

Politics latest: Sunak faces 'realistic prospect' of being ousted after local elections

A former Number 10 director of communications thinks Tory MPs could move against the prime minister if the local elections go particularly badly. Jeremy Hunt has admitted the Conservatives are expecting "significant losses".

Wednesday 1 May 2024 21:00, UK

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

• First illegal migrants bound for Rwanda detained
• Jon Craig:  Raids were like something from Miami Vice
• Scottish government survives confidence vote
• Yousaf denies he was victim of plot to oust him
• 'Realistic prospect' Tories try to oust PM after local elections
• Local elections:  All you need to know about this week's votes
• Live reporting by Faith Ridler and (earlier)  Charlotte Chelsom-Pill

Guto Harri, the former Number 10 director of communications under Boris Johnson, has said it is a "realistic prospect" the Conservatives could move against Rishi Sunak if the results of the local elections are bad.

"I think that would be made and unfair, but I think it's a realistic prospect now," he tells Sophy Ridge .

"It's clear that one or two mayoral contests could be read as the trigger. It could be that the overall number is so bad that that is the trigger."

'It can be very brutal'

Mr Harri says that, by Sunday, there could be conversations across Westminster on whether Tory MPs could move against Mr Sunak.

"It can happen very, very quickly, and it can be very brutal," noting the speed at which his old boss Mr Johnson was toppled.

Andrew Fisher, former head of policy for Jeremy Corbyn, says that, in contrast, Thursday could be a good night for Labour.

"It's clearly going to be a bad night for Rishi Sunak," he says.

The Sky News live poll tracker - collated and updated by our Data and Forensics team - aggregates various surveys to indicate how voters feel about the different political parties.

With the local election campaign well under way, Labour is still sitting comfortably ahead, with the Tories trailing behind.

See the latest update below - and you can read more about the methodology behind the tracker  here .

By Sam Coates , deputy political editor

More than 2,600 seats are up for election in 107 English councils on Thursday.

Now, YouGov has made its final calls for some key contests using the MRP polling method after interviewing almost 9,000 people over two weeks.

Here, exclusively on Sky News, are the headlines. 

We'll start with two key battlegrounds...

By Tomos Evans , Wales reporter

Calls for an investigation into a £200,000 donation to Welsh First Minister Vaughan Gething have intensified in recent weeks.

A motion calling for an independent probe into the money was debated in the Senedd on Wednesday and defeated by 27 votes to 25.

But former deputy climate change minister Lee Waters said Mr Gething should do "the right thing" and return the donation.

Mr Gething was elected leader of Welsh Labour in March and succeeded Mark Drakeford as Wales's first minister.

Opposition parties launched a bid to appoint an independent advisor to check whether there was any conflict of interest over the donation during the leadership campaign.

You can read more from Sky News below:

That's it for tonight's Politics Hub programme - we'll end with an exclusive report from our political correspondent Serena Barker-Singh .

Tory MPs are threatening to rebel over the government's new housing proposals.

In a letter to Chancellor Jeremy Hunt, more than 30 Tory MPs have stated their dissatisfaction with the current leasehold system and implored the government to scrap ground rent on leasehold properties.

Housing Secretary Michael Gove previously called that "a charge for nothing" and has stated a personal preference to move towards a "peppercorn" system, where ground rent is as close to zero as possible.

Multiple Tory MPs who have signed the letter are also in favour of this proposal - citing that promise made in the Tory 2019 manifesto.

Read more below:

Former England cricket star Monty Panesar, who's standing at the next election for George Galloway's Worker's Party, is now joining Sophy Ridge .

He is asked about his change in career.

"When I played cricket for England I had fans up and down the country, I had Monty Mania happening, everyone knew who I was.

"Obviously I am a very popular figure in this country so hopefully by me getting involved in politics, I can maybe make a difference to ordinary people."

He adds: "I believe there is a huge divide between the rich and the poor at the moment, and hopefully me being involved with the Worker's Party of Britain I can come together and be that voice for the ordinary person who is walking down the street."

'Hear the voices of working people'

So why the Worker's Party?

Mr Panesar says he was introduced to the party by a friend, and asked if he wanted to run as an MP in the Ealing Southall constituency at the next general election.

Pressed, the former cricketer says he doesn't believe Labour and the Tories are here to "hear the voices of the working people".

He says the party wants to "redistribute the power between the rich and the poor", by introducing wealth tax on large estates.

The would-be MP wants to extend free public transport for children across the UK.

Sophy is now joined by Labour frontbencher Nick Thomas-Symonds, and they begin their conversation on the government's Rwanda scheme.

So will Labour scrap the policy?

"We will replace the Rwanda policy," he says. "And we've seen previously the work of similar schemes. 

"Israel, for example, had an agreement with Rwanda that had to be abandoned in 2018 because it wasn't working. 

"We can see from past experience, what the situation is with a scheme like this. 

"We believe that the money that's been allocated to the Rwanda scheme would be better spent on a new unit in the National Crime Agency that would be able to work internationally to bust the model of the people smuggler gangs. 

"Secondly, we need to really get a grip of the asylum system, the enormous backlog that we have. 

"The amount of money that's being spent on people in hotels, a miserable existence for them, really is not value for money for the taxpayer."

Ahead of the confidence vote in the Scottish government, outgoing first minister Humza Yousaf spoke to our Scotland correspondent Connor Gillies about the SNP leadership contest.

He called on colleagues to ensure the race was "civil", having come through a bruising battle with party rivals just over a year ago.

Watch the full interview below:

Next up on tonight's show is some relief for Scotland's outgoing first minister after his government survived a no confidence vote.

Humza Yousaf announced his resignation earlier this week, but it could have been worse for the SNP after Scottish Labour forced a vote at Holyrood this afternoon.

Despite Labour and the Tories uniting to try to bring down the government, it wasn't enough to force the nationalist party out of office.

Read more from our Scotland reporter Jenness Mitchell below:

Sir Keir Starmer also told Sky News today he doesn't "believe" in the government's Rwanda scheme.

He said Labour would ditch it, vowing not to "flog a dead horse".

His plan would be to "stop the gangs that are running this vile trade" of smuggling people across the Channel, working with law enforcement in Europe.

"And that's why I've already had discussions in The Hague (including with EU law enforcement agency Europol) about how quickly we can share data intelligence to do that," he said.

"I'm absolutely determined to tackle this problem because the government has lost control of the borders."

Watch more below:

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free

Justices Seem Ready to Limit the 2020 Election Case Against Trump

Such a ruling in the case, on whether the former president is immune from prosecution, would probably send it back to a lower court and could delay any trial until after the November election.

• Share full article

Charlie Savage and Alan Feuer

Charlie Savage reported from Washington, and Alan Feuer from New York.

Here are four takeaways from the Supreme Court hearing on Trump’s claim to immunity.

The Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday about Donald J. Trump’s claim that the federal charges accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election must be thrown out because he is immune from being prosecuted for any official act he took as president.

Here are some takeaways.

Several justices seemed to want to define some level of official act as immune.

Although Mr. Trump’s claim of near-absolute immunity was seen as a long shot intended primarily to slow the proceedings, several members of the Republican-appointed majority seemed to indicate that some immunity was needed. Some of them expressed worry about the long-term consequences of leaving future former presidents open to prosecution for their official actions.

Among others, Justice Brett Kavanaugh compared the threat of prosecution for official acts to how a series of presidents were “hampered” by independent counsel investigations, criticizing a 1984 ruling that upheld a now-defunct law creating such prosecutors as one of the Supreme Court’s biggest mistakes. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. criticized an appeals court ruling rejecting immunity for Mr. Trump, saying he was concerned that it “did not get into a focused consideration of what acts we are talking about or what documents are talking about.”

“It’s a serious constitutional question whether a statute can be applied to the president’s official acts. So wouldn’t you always interpret the statute not to apply to the president, even under your formulation, unless Congress had spoken with some clarity?” “I don’t think across the board that as serious constitutional question exists on applying any criminal statute to the president.” “The problem is the vague statute — obstruction and 371, conspiracy to defraud the United States can be used against a lot of presidential activities historically with a creative prosecutor who wants to go after a president.” “I think that the question about the risk is very serious. And obviously it is a question that this court has to evaluate. For the executive branch, our view is that there is a balanced protection that better serves the interests of the Constitution that incorporates both accountability and protection for the president.”

The Democrat-appointed justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — asked questions indicating greater concern about opening the door for presidents to commit official crimes with impunity.

“This is what you’re asking us to say, which is that a president is entitled not to make a mistake — but more than that, a president is entitled for total personal gain to use the trappings of his office. That’s what you’re trying to get us to hold — without facing criminal liability.” “Your honor, I would say three things in response to that. First, the doctrine that immunity does not turn on the allegedly improper motivation or purpose is something that this court has reaffirmed in at least nine or 10 —” “That’s absolute immunity. But qualified immunity does say that whatever act you take has to be within what a reasonable person would do. I’m having a hard time thinking that creating false documents, that submitting false documents, that ordering the assassination of a rival, that accepting a bribe, and countless other laws that could be broken for personal gain, that anyone would say that it would be reasonable for a president or any public official to do that.”

The arguments signaled further delay and complications for a Trump trial.

If the Supreme Court does place limits on the ability of prosecutors to charge Mr. Trump over his official actions, it could alter the shape of his trial.

A decision to send all or part of the case back to the lower courts could further slow progress toward a trial, increasing the odds that it does not start before Election Day.

Of the matters listed in the indictment, some — like working with private lawyers to gin up slates of fraudulent electors — seem like the private actions of a candidate. Others — like pressuring the Justice Department and Vice President Mike Pence to do things — seem more like official acts he took in his role as president.

At one point, Justice Amy Coney Barrett suggested that prosecutors could simply drop Mr. Trump’s arguably official actions from their case and proceed to a swift trial focused only on his private actions. And D. John Sauer, the lawyer for Mr. Trump, told the court that no evidence of Mr. Trump’s official actions should be allowed into the trial.

But Michael R. Dreeben, a Justice Department lawyer arguing on behalf of the special counsel’s office, said the indictment laid out an “integrated conspiracy” in which Mr. Trump took the official actions to bolster the chances that his other efforts to overturn the election would succeed.

He argued that even if the court holds that Mr. Trump has immunity from liability for his official actions, prosecutors should still be allowed to present evidence about them to the jury because the actions are relevant to assessing his larger knowledge and intentions — just as speech that is protected by the First Amendment can still be used as evidence in a conspiracy case.

The hearing revolved around two very different ways of looking at the issue.

Looming over the hearing was a sweeping moral question: What effect might executive immunity have on the future of American politics?

Not surprisingly, the two sides saw things very differently.

Mr. Sauer claimed that without immunity, all presidents would be paralyzed by the knowledge that once they were out of office, they could face an onslaught of charges from their rivals based on the tough calls they had to make while in power. He pictured a dystopian world of ceaseless tit-for-tat political prosecutions that would destroy the “presidency as we know it.”

If a president can be charged, put on trial and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president’s decision-making precisely when bold and fearless action is most needed. Every current president will face de facto blackmail and extortion by his political rivals while he is still in office. The implications of the court’s decision here extend far beyond the facts of this case. Could President George W. Bush have been sent to prison for obstructing an official proceeding or allegedly lying to Congress to induce war in Iraq? Could President Obama be charged with murder for killing U.S. citizens abroad by drone strike? Could President Biden someday be charged with unlawfully inducing immigrants to enter the country illegally for his border policies? The answer to all these questions is no.

Envisioning the opposite scenario, Mr. Dreeben worried that any form of blanket immunity would place presidents entirely outside of the rule of law and encourage them to commit crimes, including “bribery, treason, sedition, even murder,” with impunity.

“The framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do no wrong,” he said.

This court has never recognized absolute criminal immunity for any public official. Petitioner, however, claims that a former president has permanent criminal immunity for his official acts unless he was first impeached and convicted. His novel theory would immunize former presidents for criminal liability; for bribery, treason, sedition, murder and here, conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power. Such presidential immunity has no foundation in the Constitution. The framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do no wrong.

Both sides found advocates for their positions on the court.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. clearly seemed worried that without some form of criminal immunity, former presidents would be vulnerable to partisan warfare as their successors used the courts to go after them once they were out of office. And that, he added, could lead to endless cycles of retribution that would be a risk to “stable, democratic society.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson appeared more concerned that if presidents were in fact shielded by immunity, they would be unbounded by the law and could turn the Oval Office into what she described as “the seat of criminality.”

If someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority, could go into office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes, I’m trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the Oval Office into the seat of criminal activity in this country? If the potential for criminal liability is taken off the table, wouldn’t there be a significant risk that future presidents would be emboldened to commit crimes with abandon while they’re in office? It’s right now the fact that we’re having this debate, because O.L.C. has said that presidents might be prosecuted. Presidents from the beginning of time have understood that that’s a possibility. That might be what has kept this office from turning into the kind of crime center that I’m envisioning. But once we say no criminal liability, Mr. President, you can do whatever you want, I’m worried that we would have a worse problem than the problem of the president feeling constrained to follow the law while he’s in office.

What happens next?

There did not seem to be a lot of urgency among the justices — especially the conservative ones — to ensure that the immunity question was resolved quickly. That left open the possibility that Mr. Trump could avoid being tried on charges of plotting to overturn the last election until well after voters went to the polls to decide whether to choose him as president in this election.

And if he is elected, any trial could be put off while he is in office, or he could order the charges against him dropped.

It could take some time for the court to do its own analysis of what presidential acts should qualify for the protections of immunity. And even if the justices determine that at least some of the allegations against Mr. Trump are fair game for prosecution, if they do not issue a ruling until late June or early July, it could be difficult to hold a trial before November.

That would become all but impossible if the court took a different route and sent the analysis back to the trial judge, Tanya S. Chutkan. If Judge Chutkan were ordered to hold further hearings on which of the indictment’s numerous allegations were official acts of Mr. Trump’s presidency and which were private acts he took as a candidate for office, the process could take months and last well into 2025.

Aishvarya Kavi

Reporting from Washington

A spectacle outside the Supreme Court for Trump’s defenders and detractors.

Just as the Supreme Court began considering on Thursday morning whether former President Donald J. Trump was entitled to absolute immunity, rap music started blaring outside the court.

The lyrics, laced with expletives, denounced Mr. Trump, and several dozen demonstrators began chanting, “Trump is not above the law!”

Mr. Trump was not in Washington on Thursday morning — in fact, he was in another courtroom , in New York. But the spectacle that pierced the relative tranquillity outside the court was typical of events that involve him: demonstrations, homemade signs, police, news media, and lots and lots of curious onlookers.

One man, Stephen Parlato, a retired mental health counselor from Boulder, Colo., held a roughly 6-foot-long sign with a blown-up photo of Mr. Trump scowling that read, “Toxic loser.” The back of the sign featured the famous painting by Cassius Marcellus Coolidge of dogs playing poker, adorned with the words, “Faith erodes … in a court with no binding ethics code.” He made the sign at FedEx, he said.

The Supreme Court’s decision to even hear the case, which has delayed Mr. Trump’s election interference trial , was “absurd,” he said.

“I’m a child of the late ’60s and early ’70s and the Vietnam War,” said Mr. Parlato, dressed in a leather jacket and cowboy hat. “I remember protesting that while in high school. But this is very different. I’m here because I’m terrified of the possibility of a second Trump presidency.”

Inside the court, Jack Smith sat to the far right of the lawyer arguing on behalf of his team of prosecutors, Michael R. Dreeben, a leading expert in criminal law who has worked for another special counsel who investigated Mr. Trump, Robert S. Mueller III.

Among those in attendance were Jane Sullivan Roberts, who is married to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and Ashley Estes Kavanaugh, who is married to Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.

In an orderly line outside along the side of the court, people were calmly waiting to listen to the arguments from the court’s public gallery. More than 100 people, many of them supporters of Mr. Trump, were in line as of 8:30 a.m. Reagan Pendarvis, 19, who had been waiting there since the middle of the night, said the first person in line had gotten there more than a day before the arguments began.

Mr. Pendarvis, a sophomore at the University of California, San Diego who is living in Washington for the spring semester, was wearing a black suit and bright red bow tie. He said he had been struggling to keep warm since he took his place in line.

Mr. Pendarvis, a supporter of Mr. Trump, said he thought that the cases brought against the former president were an uneven application of the law.

“I think a lot of the cases, especially that happen for Donald Trump, don’t really happen for Democrats on the other side,” he said. “That’s just my take on it.”

David Bolls, 42, and his brother, Jonathan, 43, both of Springfield, Va., also in line for the arguments, also contended that the prosecutions against Mr. Trump were an abuse of judicial power.

“For me, I want to see an even application of justice,” David Bolls said.

For others in line, the Supreme Court’s deliberations were not the main draw. Ellen Murphy, a longtime Washington resident, was trying to sell buttons she designs, though she acknowledged that it was unlikely she would be allowed in with all of her merchandise.

Dozens of the buttons, which said, “Immunize democracy now” and “Trump is toast” over a toaster with two slices of bread, were pinned to a green apron she was wearing.

“We lose our democracy,” Ms. Murphy said, “if the president can do whatever he wants just because he’s president.”

Eileen Sullivan contributed reporting.

Advertisement

Adam Liptak

What’s next: Much will turn on how quickly the court acts.

The justices heard arguments in the immunity case at a special session, the day after what had been the last scheduled argument of its term. Arguments heard in late April almost always yield decisions near the end of the court’s term, in late June or early July.

But a ruling in early summer, even if it categorically rejected Mr. Trump’s position, would make it hard to complete his trial before the election. Should Mr. Trump win at the polls, there is every reason to think he would scuttle the prosecution.

In cases that directly affected elections — in which the mechanisms of voting were at issue — the court has sometimes acted with unusual speed.

In 2000, in Bush v. Gore, the court issued its decision handing the presidency to George W. Bush the day after the justices heard arguments.

In a recent case concerning Mr. Trump’s eligibility to appear on Colorado’s primary ballot, the justices moved more slowly, but still at a relatively brisk pace. The court granted Mr. Trump’s petition seeking review just two days after he filed it , scheduled arguments for about a month later and issued its decision in his favor about a month after that.

In United States v. Nixon, the 1974 decision that ordered President Richard M. Nixon to comply with a subpoena for audiotapes of conversations with aides in the White House, the court also moved quickly , granting the special prosecutor’s request to bypass the appeals court a week after it was filed.

The court heard arguments about five weeks later — compared with some eight weeks in Mr. Trump’s immunity case. It issued its decision 16 days after the argument , and the trial was not delayed.

Abbie VanSickle

The oral argument lasted nearly three hours, as the justices tangled with a lawyer for the former president and a Justice Department lawyer. A majority of the justices appeared skeptical of the idea of sweeping presidential immunity. However, several of them suggested an interest in drawing out what actions may be immune and what may not — a move that could delay the former president’s trial if the Supreme Court asks a lower court to revisit the issues.

Many of the justices seemed to be considering the idea that presidents should enjoy some form of protection against criminal prosecution. The devil, however, will be in the details: How should that protection extend?

And that question will have profound relevance not only for future presidents, but much more immediately for Donald Trump. The court could decide to draw those rules itself in a broad way for history. Or it could send this case back to a lower court to set the rules of what form immunity could take. If the case is sent back for further proceedings, it could have a dramatic effect on the timing of Trump’s trial, pushing it well past the election in November.

Looking back, one of the main points of discussion turned on the question of which situation would be worse: a world in which presidents, shorn of any legal protections against prosecution, were ceaselessly pursued in the courts by their rivals in a never-ending cycle of political retribution, or allowing presidents to be unbounded by criminal law and permitted to do whatever they wanted with impunity.

Charlie Savage

Sauer, Trump’s attorney, declines to offer a rebuttal. The argument is over.

If the court finds that there is some immunity for official actions, one of the most important questions will be whether prosecutors can still present evidence to the jury of Trump’s official actions (like pressuring the Justice Department and Vice President Mike Pence to do certain things) as evidence that helps illuminate Trump’s knowledge and intent for his private acts as a candidate. Dreeben says the jury needs to understand the whole “integrated conspiracy” but prosecutors would accept a jury instruction in which the judge would say they cannot impose liability for the official actions but may consider them as evidence of his knowledge and intent for the other actions. That’s how courts handle protected speech that is evidence to a larger conspiracy, he notes.

Justice Barrett picks up the question of timing again. She suggests that if prosecutors want to take Trump quickly to trial, they could simply drop those parts of the indictment that seem to be his official acts as president and proceed with only those parts of the indictment that reflect Trump’s private actions taken as a candidate for office. Dreeben is not wild about that idea.

Dreeben suggests that allegations in the “private acts bucket,” as Justice Jackson just called it, would include things like the scheme to create fake electors and the way in which Trump fomented a mob of his supporters to violently attack the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Justice Barrett seems to signal that she is less likely to find that presidents have blanket immunity for their official acts. When Dreeben says the system needs to balance the effective functioning of the presidency and accountability for a former president under the rule of law, and the existing system does that pretty well or maybe needs a few ancillary rules but that is different from the “radical proposal” put forward by Trump’s legal team, she says: “I agree.”

Dreeben, in a balancing act that seems to acknowledge that the court is looking for some form of criminal immunity for presidents, says he is trying to do two things at once, neither of them easy. He wants to design a system to find some rules that preserve the “effective functioning of the presidency” but that still allows for “accountability” if presidents violated the law.

Kavanaugh asks Dreeben about Obama’s drone strike that killed an American citizen suspected of terrorism, Anwar al-Awlaki, which Trump’s lawyer invoked in his opening. Dreeben notes that the Office of Legal Counsel analyzed the question and found that the murder statute did not apply to presidents when they were acting under public authority, so authorizing the strike was lawful. This is the way the system can function, he said — the Justice Department analyzes laws carefully and with established principles.

Justice Kavanaugh signals that he is likely to find that presidents must have immunity for their official actions. He talks about how the threat of prosecution by independent counsels (under a law that lapsed in 1999) hampered Presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Clinton, and says a 1984 ruling upholding that structure as constitutional was one of the Supreme Court’s biggest mistakes. (Notably, Kavanaugh was a prosecutor on the staff of independent counsel Ken Starr during his investigation into President Bill Clinton, before becoming a White House lawyer under President George W. Bush.)

Dreeben tries to push back on Kavanaugh’s argument by saying that even after Watergate, even after all of the independent counsel investigations mentioned above, the legal system has survived without “having gone off on a runaway train” of actual criminal prosecutions against former presidents.

The Supreme Court rejected Bill Clinton’s claim of immunity.

In Clinton v. Jones in 1997, the Supreme Court unanimously allowed a sexual harassment suit against President Bill Clinton to proceed while he was in office, discounting concerns that it would distract him from his official responsibilities. Both of his appointees, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, voted against him.

“The president is subject to judicial process in appropriate circumstances,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court, adding, “We have never suggested that the president, or any other official, has an immunity that extends beyond the scope of any action taken in an official capacity.”

The case was in one sense harder than the one against Mr. Trump, as it involved a sitting president. In another sense, though, it was easier, as it concerned an episode said to have taken place before Mr. Clinton took office (Paula Jones, an Arkansas state employee, said Mr. Clinton had made lewd advances in a hotel room when he was governor of the state).

The case is best remembered for a prediction in Justice Stevens’s majority opinion that “it appears to us highly unlikely to occupy any substantial amount of petitioner’s time.” In fact, it led to Mr. Clinton’s impeachment.

In the same paragraph, Justice Stevens made a second prediction.

“In the more than 200-year history of the Republic, only three sitting presidents have been subjected to suits for their private actions,” he wrote. “If the past is any indicator, it seems unlikely that a deluge of such litigation will ever engulf the presidency.”

Suits against Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman were dismissed, and one against President John F. Kennedy involving a car accident during his 1960 campaign was settled. The case against Mr. Clinton added a fourth.

Justice Stevens, who died in 2019, failed to anticipate the enormous volume of civil and criminal litigation in which Mr. Trump and his businesses have been named as defendants.

We are now over the two-hour mark of the Supreme Court’s arguments in the Trump immunity case. The Justice Department lawyer has continued to face skeptical questions from many of the court’s conservatives, several of whom appear particularly focused on how to draw the line between a president’s core powers and non-core powers. In other words, what actions by a president might be shielded from prosecution and what would not. The questioning suggests that some of the justices may favor a ruling that could lead to more lower-court proceedings, perhaps delaying the trial.

The Supreme Court’s relatively new process (coming out of Covid) of letting each justice ask questions at the end in order of seniority has an interesting consequence, as seen here. Dreeben kept wanting to say these things about government legal memos and to go into the details about the actions Trump is accused of taking, but the Republican-appointed justices kept cutting him off. It’s the turn of Kagan, a Democratic appointee, to ask any final questions she wants, and she is letting him talk on and on.

Much of the discussion this morning has swirled around the question of whether, without immunity, presidents will be hounded by their rivals with malicious charges after leaving office. Alito and other conservatives on the court seem concerned that the Trump prosecutions will open the door to endless attacks against future presidents.

The other main topic of discussion has been whether presidents enjoy some form of immunity for carrying out their official duties and, if so, how those official actions are defined. That’s an important question for the Trump election case because Trump has claimed he was acting in his role as president when, by his own account, he sought to root out fraud in the 2020 vote count. It’s also important for a different reason: the justices could send the official acts question back to a lower court to sort out, and that process could take a long time, delaying the case's trial until after this year’s election.

Justice Alito suggests that there is a risk to our stable democracy if presidents who lose close elections would not be allowed to retire in peace but could face prosecution. He has essentially flipped the situation under consideration upside down: that Trump is being prosecuted for having used fraud to remain in power after losing a close election.

A part of this exchange between Justice Alito and the Justice Department's lawyer, Dreeben, gets at a pressure point in American-style democracy and the rule of law. One of the safeguards against illegitimate prosecutions of ex-presidents, Dreeben says, is that if the Justice Department has advised the president that doing something would be lawful, the department could not later turn around and prosecute the now-former president for relying on that advice and doing that thing.

Alito points out that this creates an incentive for presidents to appoint attorneys general who will just tell them that anything they want to do would be legal. Indeed — that is a critique of the Office of Legal Counsel system, in which politically appointed lawyers decide what the law means for the executive branch.

An example: During the George W. Bush administration, memos about post-9/11 surveillance and torture were written by a politically appointed lawyer with idiosyncratically broad views of a president’s supposed power, as commander in chief, to authorize violations of surveillance and torture laws. The Justice Department later withdrew those memos as espousing a false view of the law, but held that officials who had taken action based on those memos could not be charged with crimes.

Justice Alito suggests there are not enough legal safeguards in place to protect presidents against malicious prosecution if they don’t have some form of immunity. He tells Dreeben that the grand jury process isn’t much of a protection because prosecutors, as the saying goes, can indict a ham sandwich. When Dreeben tries to argue that prosecutors sometimes don’t indict people who don’t deserve it, Alito dismissively says, “Every once in a while there’s an eclipse too.”

If you are just joining in, the justices are questioning the Justice Department lawyer, Michael Dreeben, about the government’s argument that former President Trump is not absolutely immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. Dreeben has faced skeptical questions from several of the conservative justices, including both Justices Alito and Kavanaugh, who have suggested that the fraud conspiracy statute being used against the former president is vague. That statute is central to the government’s case against Trump.

Justice Alito now joins Justice Kavanaugh in suggesting that the fraud conspiracy statute is very vague and broadly drawn. That is bad news for the indictment brought against Trump by Jack Smith, the special counsel.

The scope and viability of this fraud statute, which is absolutely central to the Trump indictment, wasn’t on the menu of issues seemingly at play in this hearing. Kavanaugh and Alito appear to have gone out of their way to question its use in the Trump case.

Justice Sotomayor points out that under the Trump team’s theory that a criminal statute has to clearly state that it applies to the presidency for it to cover a president’s official actions, there would essentially be no accountability at all. Because only a tiny handful of laws mention the president, that means a president could act contrary to them without violating them. As a result, the Senate could not even impeach a president for violating criminal statutes, she says — because he would not be violating those laws if they don’t apply to the president.

Dreeben is under heavy fire from the court’s conservatives.

The precedent most helpful to Trump: Nixon v. Fitzgerald.

In 1982, in Nixon v. Fitzgerald , the Supreme Court ruled that former President Richard M. Nixon had absolute immunity from civil lawsuits — ones brought by private litigants seeking money — for conduct “within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.”

The ruling is helpful to former President Donald J. Trump, establishing as it does that immunity can be expansive, lives on after a president leaves office and extends to the very limits of what may be said to be official conduct.

But the decision also falls well short of dictating the outcome in the case that is being argued on Thursday, which concerns a criminal prosecution, not a civil suit.

The 1982 case arose from a lawsuit brought by an Air Force analyst, A. Ernest Fitzgerald, who said he was fired in 1970 in retaliation for his criticism of cost overruns. By the time the Supreme Court acted, Nixon had been out of office for several years.

“In view of the special nature of the president’s constitutional office and functions,” Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. wrote for the majority 5-to-4 decision, “we think it appropriate to recognize absolute presidential immunity from damages liability” for Nixon’s official conduct, broadly defined.

But the decision drew a sharp line between civil suits, which it said can be abusive and harassing, and criminal prosecutions like the one Mr. Trump is facing.

“In view of the visibility of his office and the effect of his actions on countless people, the president would be an easily identifiable target for suits for civil damages,” Justice Powell wrote, adding, “The court has recognized before that there is a lesser public interest in actions for civil damages than, for example, in criminal prosecutions.”

Chief Justice Warren E. Burger underscored the point in a concurring opinion. “The immunity is limited to civil damages claims,” he wrote.

Even in the context of civil suits, Nixon v. Fitzgerald conferred immunity only on conduct within the “outer perimeter” of a president’s official duties. Jack Smith, the special counsel, has said that Mr. Trump’s efforts to subvert democracy are well outside that line.