WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is to meet in private Friday for a high-profile issue regarding President Donald Trump ’s birthright citizenship order, which states that children born to parents in the U.S. illegally or temporarily are not American citizens.
The justices may announce as early as Monday whether they will hear Trump’s appeal of unanimous lower court rulings that struck down the citizenship restrictions. These regulations haven't been enforced in any state within the U.S.
If the court chooses to intervene, the case will be argued in the spring, with a ruling expected by early summer.
Trump’s birthright citizenship order was introduced on the first day of his second term, fitting into a broader crackdown on immigration, including heightened immigration enforcement and the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act for the first time in peacetime.
The administration confronts various court challenges, and the Supreme Court has provided mixed guidance through emergency orders. While it prevented using the Alien Enemies Act to fast-track deportations of alleged Venezuelan gang members, it allowed racial profiling tactics to resume in Los Angeles despite prior judicial injunctions.
The issuance of this citizenship order is the first Trump-sponsored immigration-related policy reaching the Supreme Court. If implemented, it would challenge over 125 years of understanding that the 14th Amendment grants citizenship to individuals born on American soil, with certain exceptions. Lower courts have uniformly ruled against the order, viewing it as unconstitutional or likely so, even after a Supreme Court ruling in June that moderated judges' use of nationwide injunctions.
While the Court curtailed such injunctions, it did not rule out nationwide impacts from other judicial orders. Every lower court addressing the order thus far suggests that it likely violates the 14th Amendment, which was established to secure citizenship for marginalized groups, including former slaves.
The administration's argument posits that children of noncitizens fall outside U.S. jurisdiction, thus denying them citizenship rights. Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the Court to review its decisions, indicating that preventing the implementation of the policy undermines border security and unlawfully bestows citizenship rights on a large number of individuals.
The upcoming discussions reflect a vital intersection of immigration policy, constitutional interpretation, and the enduring implications of citizenship in America.
