The Trump administration has officially requested the Supreme Court’s permission to proceed with terminating birthright citizenship, a policy signed by President Donald Trump at the onset of his second term. The administration contends that lower courts have overstepped by issuing nationwide injunctions that have blocked the controversial policy. This move comes after a federal judge declared the policy “blatantly unconstitutional” in January, preventing its implementation.
The Constitutional Debate
The 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution unequivocally guarantees citizenship to anyone “born or naturalized in the United States,” irrespective of their parents’ immigration status. For over 150 years, this interpretation has been upheld by courts, with a landmark Supreme Court precedent from 1898 affirming this reading of the law. Despite this historical context, the Trump administration has argued that the conventional understanding of birthright citizenship is flawed, emphasizing that the 14th Amendment specifies that citizenship benefits apply only to those “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States.
Some conservative circles echo this interpretation, suggesting that not all individuals born on U.S. soil fall under this jurisdictional clause. However, the modern Supreme Court has not indicated any intention to revisit this established interpretation. Nevertheless, courts in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington have all issued injunctions blocking the policy’s implementation. These legal actions were prompted by more than 20 states, two immigrant rights groups, and seven individual plaintiffs who sought these injunctions.
The Justice Department’s Concerns
The Justice Department has voiced its concerns regarding the proliferation of universal injunctions, noting:
“Universal injunctions have reached epidemic proportions since the start of the current administration,” – The Justice Department
Legal opposition to the policy is strong. Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project and lead attorney in one of the cases against the Trump administration, expressed his vehement disapproval:
“The president’s executive order is outrageously illegal and cruel, and it should not be applied to a single baby in this country.”
Wofsy further pledged continued efforts to combat the executive order:
“We are going to continue fighting to ensure that no child is denied their citizenship by this executive order.”
As the dispute escalates to the Supreme Court, a briefing schedule is expected to be set soon. This schedule will likely require rapid responses from those challenging the Trump administration’s policy, possibly within several days. The outcome of this legal battle could have significant implications on the interpretation of citizenship laws in the United States.
What The Author Thinks
The effort to terminate birthright citizenship is an alarming overreach that undermines established legal precedent and could have far-reaching consequences for the nation’s values. The 14th Amendment was designed to ensure that all individuals born on U.S. soil receive equal protection, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. If this policy is overturned, it could create an unjust precedent that discriminates against certain groups based on their background, causing unnecessary division and uncertainty for future generations
