The Supreme Court will determine the constitutionality of a directive by President Donald Trump that seeks to restrict birthright citizenship in the United States. The justices on Friday agreed to hear a Justice Department appeal of lower court rulings that blocked the executive order, a move that challenges the long-standing interpretation of a 19th century constitutional provision.
President Trump signed the order on 20 January, his first day back in office for a second term, as part of a broader suite of initiatives aimed at curbing both legal and illegal immigration. The policy instructs US agencies not to recognize the citizenship of children born in the US if neither parent is an American citizen or a lawful permanent resident, commonly known as a green card holder.
The administration contends that granting citizenship to virtually anyone born on US soil encourages illegal immigration and fosters “birth tourism,” where foreigners travel to the country specifically to give birth and secure citizenship for their children. “This case will have enormous consequences for the security of all Americans, and the sanctity of American citizenship,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson.
The legal battle centers on the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War. Its Citizenship Clause states that all “persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” The Trump administration argues the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes children of those in the country illegally or under temporary lawful status, such as students or certain workers. It asserts citizenship requires a parent’s “primary allegiance,” established only through “lawful domicile.”
Challengers, including parents and children whose citizenship is threatened by the directive, argue the Supreme Court already settled this issue in the 1898 precedent United States vs Wong Kim Ark. They say that ruling guarantees citizenship for children born in the US to non-citizen parents. They also note the order violates federal law, specifically the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which codified the well-settled understanding of automatic birthright citizenship reports Reuters.
“No president can change the 14th Amendment’s fundamental promise of citizenship,” said Cecillia Wang, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the plaintiffs.
The Court took up a class-action lawsuit from a New Hampshire federal court, which had blocked the order nationwide. It declined to hear a separate challenge brought by the states of Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon. The justices acted before a Boston-based appeals court could review the case, underscoring the legal gravity and need for a definitive national resolution.
This marks the second time the birthright citizenship fight has reached the high court this year. In June, the Court’s conservative majority, in a 6-3 ruling, blunted the power of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions against presidential policies but left the legality of Trump’s directive unresolved. The Court has sided with Trump in several recent decisions, allowing contested immigration policies to proceed after lower court impediments.
The justices are expected to hear arguments this term and issue a ruling by the end of June.
