U.S. Supreme Court to review Trump’s birthright citizenship order
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments this week on President Donald Trump’s order limiting birthright citizenship, placing a key immigration policy under constitutional scrutiny, Qazinform News Agency correspondent reports.
At issue is whether the executive order complies with the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which states that all persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens. The administration maintains that this provision does not automatically apply to children born to parents without legal status or with temporary residency.
Trump signed the order on the first day of his second term. It directs federal agencies not to recognize citizenship for certain children born in the country if their parents are in the U.S. unlawfully or temporarily. The policy would apply to births occurring more than 30 days after it takes effect, though it remains blocked following legal challenges.
Ahead of the hearings, Trump criticized the judicial system in public remarks, writing that “dumb judges and justices will not a great country make,” while also arguing that other countries are “selling citizenships” tied to the United States.
The case arrives at the Supreme Court after a series of lower court rulings that prevented enforcement of the order. Earlier proceedings focused on whether judges could impose nationwide injunctions. The current review will address the substance of the policy itself.
The legal debate draws on longstanding precedent. In the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court affirmed that a child born in the U.S. to foreign parents with a permanent residence was entitled to citizenship. That decision has been widely interpreted as establishing birthright citizenship, with limited exceptions such as for children of diplomats.
Government lawyers argue that the Constitution guarantees citizenship only to individuals fully subject to U.S. political authority, suggesting that temporary or unlawful presence does not meet that threshold. They also say the current interpretation has encouraged illegal migration and “birth tourism.”
Opponents, including civil rights organizations and affected families, argue that citizenship at birth applies regardless of parental status. They warn that changing this interpretation could affect large numbers of people and alter a long-standing understanding of U.S. law.
A decision is expected by late June or early July and could have broad implications for immigration policy and constitutional interpretation in the United States.
Earlier, Qazinform News Agency reported that in December the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case on whether children born in the United States to parents without legal status or on temporary visas are entitled to citizenship under the Constitution.
