SCOTUS to hear arguments about Birthright Citizenship

Post Reply New Topic

The Supreme Court said Thursday it will hear oral arguments next month on whether the Trump administration can take steps to enforce its contentious proposal to end automatic birthright citizenship while litigation continues.

The court in a brief order deferred action on an emergency request made by the Trump administration to narrow the scope of nationwide injunctions imposed by judges.

The policy for now remains blocked nationwide.

The court, when it hears arguments on May 15, will consider whether judges exceeded their authority in issuing nationwide injunctions.

The Trump emergency application does not address the legal merits of the plan, but only whether judges had the authority to put it on hold across the entire country. President Donald Trump and his MAGA allies have been harshly critical of judges who have blocked aspects of his agenda, although it is not a new phenomenon for courts to impose nationwide injunctions.

It has long been widely accepted, including by legal scholars on the left and right, that the Constitution's 14th Amendment confers automatic citizenship to almost anyone born in the United States.

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,” the amendment says. Based on historical practice, the only exception is people who are the children of diplomats.

Trump wants to adopt a completely new meaning of the language that would confer citizenship only on those who have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident.

Speaking at the White House on Thursday afternoon, Trump expressed his view that the 14th Amendment was directed only at former slaves, "and if you look at it that way we will win."

It's a view the majority of legal experts, as well as those who have challenged the proposal, disagree with.

Trump's executive order, issued on his first day in office in January, was immediately challenged, and every court that has ruled on the proposal so far has blocked it. At issue at the Supreme Court were cases filed in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state.

In court papers acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris said that judges did not have the authority to issue nationwide injunctions and that the states that sued did not have legal standing.

The Trump plan has the backing of 21 other states.

A federal judge in New Hampshire granted class-action status Thursday to a lawsuit seeking to protect babies who would be denied birthright citizenship by the Trump administration and granted a temporary block of the president's order restricting birthright citizenship from going into effect throughout the country.

The suit was brought on behalf of a pregnant immigrant, immigrant parents and their infants and had sought class-action status for all babies and their parents around the country who would be affected by the executive order.

Cody Wofsy, the plaintiffs' lead attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, argued for class-action status in front of U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante on Thursday morning, saying that the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm by being denied birthright citizenship, a claim the judge found credible.

Laplante ordered that class-action status be certified in the case but only for the babies who would be affected by the restrictions, not for the parents.

The judge also ordered a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking President Donald Trump’s order from going into effect, but stayed his order for seven days, allowing the government time to appeal.

"This is going to protect every single child around the country from this lawless, unconstitutional and cruel executive order," Wofsy said at a news conference after the hearing.

Attorneys for the Department of Justice had argued that the relief the plaintiffs were seeking was too broad and challenged whether the requirements for class-action status had been met. The department also argued that the request for the preliminary injunction and class status were premature and argued for time to appeal.

Laplante said during Thursday’s court hearing that depriving a person of the longstanding right of birthright citizenship was “irreparable harm” and that birthright citizenship was “the greatest privilege that exists in the world.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the judge’s order.

In a written order issued Thursday, Laplante wrote that the court certified class action status to the following group when issuing the nationwide block of Trump’s birthright citizenship order: “All current and future persons who are born on or after February 20, 2025, where (1) that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”