Pages

Friday, June 27, 2025

Birthright Citizenship In The US Constiution

In Birthright Citizenship Case, Supreme Court Limits Power of Judges to Block Trump Policies The ruling clears a major hurdle to President Trump’s agenda and could reshape American citizenship, at least temporarily, as lower court challenges proceed. ......... The 6-to-3 decision, which was written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett and split along ideological lines, is a major victory for Mr. Trump, and may allow how citizenship is granted in the United States to be reshaped, even temporarily......... Justices across the ideological spectrum had been critical of these so-called nationwide injunctions, arguing that they encouraged judge-shopping and improperly circumvented the political process by allowing one judge to halt a policy nationwide. ....... The surprise decision means that an executive order signed by Mr. Trump ending the practice of extending citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants born in the United States would be set to take effect in 30 days in the 28 states that have not challenged the measure. .........

“I’ve been on the bench for four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented is as clear as this one is,” Judge Coughenour said, calling Mr. Trump’s order “blatantly unconstitutional.”

......... many of the justices also seemed troubled by the practical consequences of allowing the executive order to go into effect, even temporarily and only in some parts of the country. .......... The underlying question — the legality of birthright citizenship — is a core constitutional one. The practice of automatically granting citizenship to children born on American soil, even if their parents are not citizens, has long been considered a tenet of immigration law. The 14th Amendment, ratified after the Civil War, declared that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” .......In 1898, the Supreme Court affirmed that right in a landmark case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark. For more than a century, courts have upheld that interpretation.


Birthright citizenship is part of the U.S. Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment, and a president cannot unilaterally change the Constitution via executive order. Nor can the Supreme Court “reinterpret” it away without explicitly overruling precedent or fundamentally altering its plain meaning.

Let’s break this down:

๐Ÿ”’ What the Constitution Says:

The 14th Amendment (ratified 1868) clearly states:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States…”

Historically and legally, this has been interpreted to mean that any child born on U.S. soil—regardless of their parents' immigration status—is a U.S. citizen. This includes the children of undocumented immigrants, temporary visa holders, and others.

⚖️ Can a President Change That via Executive Order?

No. A president cannot override the Constitution with an executive order. That would be blatantly unconstitutional.

Trump’s executive order attempts to reinterpret the 14th Amendment by narrowing the definition of who is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S.—but this flies in the face of over a century of constitutional interpretation and legal precedent, including the landmark 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which upheld birthright citizenship even for children of non-citizens.

๐Ÿงต What Did the Supreme Court Just Do Then?

Here’s what actually happened in this 6-3 ruling:

  • The Supreme Court did not rule on whether Trump’s executive order is constitutional (i.e., whether the order violates the 14th Amendment).

  • Instead, the Court limited the power of federal district judges to issue nationwide injunctions (broad orders that block a policy across the entire country).

  • The Court told lower courts to reconsider the scope of their injunctions. It did not lift the injunctions completely, and Trump’s order is still blocked for now—it can’t go into effect for at least 30 more days.

So: This is a procedural ruling, not a substantive constitutional one. The Court is essentially saying:

“You lower courts may have overstepped by halting this policy nationwide. Narrow your injunctions.”

๐Ÿšจ What This Could Mean

  • The executive order is still unconstitutional, but now challengers may have to fight it state-by-state, rather than relying on a single nationwide block.

  • This weakens the judiciary's ability to check executive power, especially on a national scale—a win for Trump, procedurally, but not yet a validation of his birthright policy.

  • Eventually, this case (or another) could force the Supreme Court to directly confront the question of whether the 14th Amendment includes children of undocumented or temporary residents. That would be a major constitutional battle.

๐Ÿง  Bottom Line

  • ✅ Birthright citizenship is enshrined in the Constitution and can only be changed via a constitutional amendment, not by executive order or court fiat.

  • ⚠️ The Supreme Court has not upheld Trump’s order, just curtailed how broadly it can be blocked by lower courts.

  • ๐Ÿšจ The real threat is the gradual erosion of precedent through narrow rulings and procedural victories, rather than one sweeping decision.

  • ๐Ÿ—ณ️ Ultimately, changing the 14th Amendment requires 2/3 of Congress + 3/4 of the states—a very high bar, and extremely unlikely given current polling and political alignment.


at
Labels: ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)