Supreme Court Hears Landmark Case on Birthright Citizenship Amid Trump Administration Controversy
The United States Supreme Court is set to hear a pivotal case regarding birthright citizenship, one of the most controversial executive orders issued by former President Donald Trump. This hearing, scheduled for Thursday, addresses Trump's directive to eliminate the right to citizenship for children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants—a right that has been guaranteed by the Constitution since the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification in 1868.
The central question before the Supreme Court is not solely whether Trump's executive order is constitutional, but whether the earlier rulings by lower courts—which deemed the order unlawful—can be applied nationwide. Federal judges from Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington have previously blocked the executive order, arguing that a president cannot unilaterally alter constitutional rights through executive actions.
The Trump administration has requested that the Supreme Court urgently re-evaluates these rulings, claiming that such decisions should only pertain to the parties involved in those specific lawsuits. They argue that allowing federal judges to issue national injunctions hampers the executive branch's ability to fulfill its constitutional functions.
Legal representatives for the plaintiffs, however, have countered that the Supreme Court does not need to make a broad ruling about the appropriateness of universal injunctions, emphasizing the importance of how such a ruling applies to this specific case.
Although it remains uncertain when the Supreme Court will deliver its verdict, it is anticipated that a decision could arrive before the summer recess, which typically begins in late June. Should the Court side with Trump and endorse restrictions on birthright citizenship, the impact could ripple across at least 27 states, potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of children born in the U.S. to parents lacking permanent legal status.
The parties involved in the case maintain diverging interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Amendment asserts that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens. Traditionally, this has only excluded the children of foreign diplomats and the children of enemies during wartime. Trump and his supporters argue that the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" excludes children of undocumented immigrants, asserting that these children owe loyalty to another nation.
The executive order signed on Trump's second inauguration day has sparked intense public opposition and legal battles. It was met with immediate backlash, with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filing the first lawsuit just minutes after the announcement. Multiple states, civil society organizations, and affected individuals—including pregnant women—have filed ten separate lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the order.
Historically, the Supreme Court has upheld the rights of individuals born in the U.S. to obtain citizenship, as demonstrated in the landmark case of Wong Kim Ark in 1898. Wong, born in the U.S. to Chinese parents, was denied citizenship based on his parents' immigration status, but the Supreme Court ruled in his favor, affirming that the Constitution grants citizenship to anyone born on American soil.
If the executive order takes effect, it could lead to hundreds of thousands of children being classified as illegal residents, subject to potential mass deportations as part of the administration's stringent anti-immigration campaign. This situation raises concerns about their statelessness, particularly for those born to parents from countries lacking diplomatic relations with the United States.
Research from the Migration Policy Institute indicates that ending birthright citizenship could increase the number of undocumented residents by an estimated 27 million by 2045, with projections rising to 54 million by 2075. Additionally, approximately 255,000 U.S.-born children could start life without citizenship each year, creating a class of individuals denied the rights and benefits that citizenship affords to their peers.
The ramifications of such a ruling are profound, posing a threat to social cohesion and economic mobility, as those born in the U.S. without citizenship could face significant barriers in their educational and professional trajectories.
As the Supreme Court prepares to deliberate this critical issue, the nation watches closely, aware that the outcome will not only shape the legal landscape surrounding birthright citizenship but also profoundly impact the lives of countless families across the United States.
Related Sources: