Supreme Court Takes On Explosive Showdown Over Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order
The Supreme Court has agreed to wade into one of the most consequential immigration battles of President Donald Trump’s second term, announcing Friday that it will review whether his executive order limiting birthright citizenship passes constitutional muster. The order declares that children born on American soil to parents who are in the country illegally or only on a temporary basis are not U.S. citizens.
Trump is appealing a lower-court ruling that invalidated the order nationwide. Although the directive has been blocked from taking effect anywhere, the justices will now hear full arguments this spring, with a final decision expected early in the summer.
The executive order — signed on Jan. 20, the opening day of Trump’s second term — is a centerpiece of his administration’s larger push to overhaul federal immigration policy. The White House has also initiated aggressive enforcement operations in multiple cities and has, for the first time in peacetime, invoked the Alien Enemies Act of the 1790s.
Litigation against the administration has mounted quickly, leaving the Supreme Court to referee high-stakes disputes. For instance, the justices recently halted the administration’s plan to use the Alien Enemies Act to expedite removals of Venezuelan nationals accused of gang activity. Yet the Court also lifted a block on Los Angeles–area saturation stops, allowing officers to resume immigration sweeps even when based on factors such as race, language, occupation, or location.
Another emergency appeal remains pending: the administration’s request to deploy National Guard units for immigration enforcement in the Chicago region, something a lower court has forbidden for now.
Trump’s citizenship order marks the first full immigration-policy showdown of his second term to reach the justices for a final ruling.
If upheld, the policy would dramatically revise more than a century of legal understanding. Since the late 1800s, the prevailing interpretation of the 14th Amendment has been that nearly all children born within U.S. borders are citizens at birth, except those born to diplomats or to foreign occupying forces.
But every lower court to examine Trump’s directive has struck it down as unconstitutional or likely so. Even after the Supreme Court’s June decision scaling back nationwide injunctions, judges have continued to block the order through class actions and state-led lawsuits — tools the justices left intact. The high court has not yet addressed whether the underlying policy itself can survive constitutional scrutiny.
In New Hampshire, a federal judge barred implementation of the order in July in a sweeping class action covering all children who would be subject to its restrictions. And on the West Coast, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Democrat-led states challenging the order required a nationwide injunction to avoid a chaotic patchwork of citizenship rules between states. The Supreme Court did not act on the administration’s request to overturn that ruling.
The administration maintains that the 14th Amendment has been misconstrued for generations and argues that the children of noncitizens do not qualify for automatic citizenship because they are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States in the constitutional sense. As the government’s lead Supreme Court litigator, D. John Sauer, wrote, “The Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause was adopted to grant citizenship to newly freed slaves and their children — not … to the children of aliens illegally or temporarily in the United States.”
The fight has drawn strong political backing. Twenty-four Republican-led states and 27 GOP lawmakers — including Sens. Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham — have lined up behind Trump’s legal position.
{Matzav.com}
