The Supreme Court is set to convene Wednesday to consider the legality of President Trump’s executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship.
{snip}
The question before the Supreme Court is whether the president’s executive order on birthright citizenship violates the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment and a provision of federal law that codified that clause. That statute was first enacted through the Nationality Act in 1940 and then reenacted in the Immigration and Nationality Act in 1952.
The Citizenship Clause 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.”
A decision in the case is expected by the end of June or early July. If the high court rules against the Trump administration, it would mark the second major loss for the president in his second term. In a 6-3 decision in February, the Supreme Court struck down many of his tariffs issued under an emergency powers law.
{snip}
The Trump administration had argued then that lower court judges do not have the power to impose that universal relief, and the Supreme Court agreed to curtail judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions.
Lower courts were directed to reevaluate their orders blocking the president’s birthright citizenship directive to ensure the injunctions weren’t “broader than necessary” to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs that sued.
{snip}
The Trump administration is urging the Supreme Court to uphold Mr. Trump’s executive order. The 14th Amendment, it said, does not grant citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country unlawfully or temporarily, like those in the U.S. through the Visa Waiver Program or with student or work visas.
Instead, Solicitor General D. John Sauer said the clause guarantees citizenship only to those who are “completely subject” to the nation’s political jurisdiction, meaning they owe “direct and immediate allegiance” to the U.S. and may claim its protection.
For people in the U.S. with temporary status, Sauer argued that their children don’t have sufficient ties to the U.S. and are unlikely to develop them since their parents will presumably return to their home countries. For undocumented immigrants, he said that they’re by definition in violation of the law, and that defiance is “inconsistent with establishing the requisite allegiance” to the U.S.
Sauer wrote that the Supreme Court’s decision in Wong Kim Ark recognized that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to children born in the U.S. to citizens and foreign nationals with a “permanent domicil and residence” — or a fixed and permanent home — in the country. He claimed the executive branch has “misread” the Citizenship Clause since the mid-20th Century.
{snip}
The post The Supreme Court Will Weigh Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order This Week. Here’s What to Know About the Case. appeared first on American Renaissance.
American RenaissanceRead More
R1
T1
