The Supreme Court of the United States began reviewing one of Donald Trump’s most controversial immigration initiatives on Wednesday: his desire to challenge birthright citizenship, the fundamental principle that anyone born on US soil automatically acquires citizenship.
The Republican president, behind this unprecedented legal offensive, even attended the hearing, a unique gesture for a sitting president. His presence immediately gave this session a particular political and symbolic significance.
Donald Trump left the hearing after his solicitor general, John Sauer, presented, and did not stay for the arguments from the lawyer of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Cecillia Wang, who defends birthright citizenship.
Upon his return to the White House last year, Trump signed an order stating that children born to parents staying illegally in the US or with temporary visas would not automatically become American citizens.
Lower courts have deemed this measure unconstitutional, arguing that almost all individuals born on US soil are American citizens under the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment.
John Sauer told the Court that “unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations” and “cheapens the invaluable and profound gift of American citizenship.”
“It is a powerful attraction for illegal immigration and rewards foreigners in illegal status who not only break immigration laws, but also jump ahead of those who follow the rules,” he stated.
The Supreme Court, dominated by conservatives, showed skepticism towards the intention to end birthright citizenship. Chief Justice John Roberts asked Sauer about the frequency of “birth tourism” before emphasizing that, no matter the statistics, it would have “no impact on the legal analysis” of the case.
“We live in a new world, where eight billion people are a plane ride away from having an American citizen child,” John Sauer said.
“This is a new world, but it is the same Constitution,” John Roberts responded.
A Category of Unauthorized Foreigners
The 14th Amendment states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States.”
It does not apply to individuals not under U.S. jurisdiction, such as children of foreign diplomats, and John Roberts mentioned that the administration seemed to seek to extend exceptions “to an entire category of unauthorized foreigners,” a step he labeled as “eccentric.”
Another conservative judge, Brett Kavanaugh, asked Sauer why he referenced other countries’ birthright policies.
“We are trying to interpret American law with American precedents based on American history,” Kavanaugh stated. “Why should we care about other countries in the world? I do not see the relevance of a legal and constitutional interpretation.”
Cecilia Wang, the ACLU lawyer, told the judges that rejecting birthright citizenship would challenge “the citizenship of millions of Americans in the past, present, and future.”
“Ask any American what our rule is on citizenship and they will tell you that anyone born here is a citizen just like anyone else,” Cecilia Wang said. “This rule was inscribed in the 14th Amendment to keep it out of reach of any government official who would want to destroy it.”
Donald Trump spent the first year of his second term asserting extraordinary executive powers while trying to sideline Congress and regularly pressuring the courts, calling judges “thugs” and “criminals.”
The Trump administration argues that the 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War of 1861-1865, pertains to the citizenship rights of former slaves and not the children of migrants or undocumented visitors.
Trump’s decree is based on the idea that anyone unlawfully in the U.S. or with a visa is not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the country and is therefore excluded from automatic citizenship.
The Supreme Court rejected such a strict definition in a historic 1898 case involving a man in San Francisco from Chinese parents.
Conservatives hold a 6-3 supermajority on the high court, and three judges were appointed by Trump.
If the Supreme Court rejects the elimination of birthright citizenship, it would be the second major loss for the American president during this term, after judges invalidated most of his global tariffs in February.
A decision from the Court in this birthright citizenship case is expected by the end of June or the beginning of July.
