Donald Trump firm on ending birthright citizenship by approaching the supreme court for intervention despite federal courts rejecting his executive order.
The order, Executive Order 14156, aims to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the US to undocumented parents or temporary visa holders
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 and of the state wherein they reside.”
Critics argue that Trump’s order fundamentally misinterprets this constitutional guarantee.
Federal judges in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington state, in their rulings, have stated that such a move would appear plainly contrary to the text of the 14th Amendment and legal precedent, which has long guaranteed citizenship to all individuals born on U.S. soil.
A federal judge in Maryland has issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship.
President Donald Trump’s administration has asked the Supreme Court to significantly narrow nationwide injunctions issued by three different federal judges blocking his executive order redefining birthright citizenship in the U.S. These courts found that the executive order contradicted established interpretations of the 14th Amendment.
The emergency applications ask the justices to take a “modest” step and roll back the judges’ restrictions on Trump’s Day 1 order, allowing federal agencies to move forward with developing guidance and preparing for implementation if, at the end of litigation, the president prevails. Trump’s administration argued that the existing interpretation of birthright citizenship serves as a significant attraction for illegal immigration, complicating enforcement and immigration policy.
“At a minimum, the Court should stay the injunctions to the extent they prohibit agencies from developing and issuing public guidance regarding the implementation of the Order. Only this Court’s intervention can prevent universal injunctions from becoming universally acceptable,” Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris wrote in the application.
The administration said it is coming to the justices with a “modest” request.
Trump’s executive order would deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to unlawful immigrants or those on a temporary immigrant status. The administration claimed in court proceedings that birthright citizenship creates a robust incentive for illegal immigration, asserting that changes are necessary for national security and immigration reform.
The Trump administration, in its appeals to the Supreme Court, railed against the use of nationwide injunctions and said they should be limited to the plaintiffs involved in the legal challenges. The administration expressed concern that reliance on universal injunctions by district courts could undermine the judicial process.
“This Court should declare that enough is enough before district courts’ burgeoning reliance on universal injunctions becomes further entrenched,” the acting solicitor general wrote. “The Court should stay the district courts’ preliminary injunctions except as to the individual plaintiffs and the identified members of the organizational plaintiffs (and, if the Court concludes that states are proper litigants, as to individuals who are born or reside in those states).”
“At a minimum, the Court should stay the injunctions to the extent they prohibit agencies from developing and issuing public guidance regarding the implementation of the Order. Only this Court’s intervention can prevent universal injunctions from becoming universally acceptable.”
The Supreme Court’s decision could have far-reaching implications for US immigration policy and the Constitution’s Citizenship Clause.
Critics argue that Trump’s order violates the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship, while supporters claim it’s necessary to address immigration issues.
The Key Implications are:- Denial of Citizenship:- Hundreds of thousands of children born in the US to undocumented or temporary visa holders could be denied citizenship.
This could lead to an increase in stateless individuals, who face significant legal and social challenges.
The Supreme Court’s decision could redefine US immigration policy and the interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.