The Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump’s executive order to restrict birthright citizenship to take effect, but only in 22 states across the country, for now.
- However, this decision will allow the Trump Administration to implement the executive order in 30 days. But it does not revoke citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants; it will apply only to new births.
- The opinion supporting the Trump Administration was written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett—nominated by Trump—who focused on nationwide injunctions issued by District Court judges. She stated that such injunctions “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.”
- Trump celebrates decision
The 6-3 decision seeks to limit judges’ ability to block presidential policies nationwide. This means that decisions by District Court judges and even appellate courts will apply only to the states under their jurisdiction in lawsuits.
The president’s executive order aims to ensure that children of undocumented immigrants and foreigners with temporary visas (tourists, students, workers) cannot obtain birthright citizenship.
The justices have not yet ruled on whether President Trump’s decision to restrict birthright citizenship is constitutional, due to the debate over the 14th Amendment.
However, this decision will allow the Trump Administration to implement the executive order in 30 days. But it does not revoke citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants; it will apply only to new births.
The Supreme Court’s decision limited rulings blocking Trump’s order to the 22 states led by Democrats where pregnant women and civil organizations are suing.
The cases will return to the courts where the original lawsuits were filed, after which both the plaintiffs and the federal government could appeal once the appellate courts issue their final rulings.
The opinion supporting the Trump Administration was written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett—nominated by Trump—who focused on nationwide injunctions issued by District Court judges. She stated that such injunctions “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the dissenting opinion, criticizing the Trump Administration’s efforts to end birthright citizenship while also rebuking her conservative colleagues for enabling the federal government’s judicial maneuvers. She centered her argument on the scope of District Court judges’ rulings in shaping government policy.
More than half a dozen lawsuits against Trump’s order were filed in courts across the country before it took effect. However, three federal district courts in Washington, Maryland, and Massachusetts blocked it.
The central argument of the Department of Justice, representing the Trump Administration, was that the Supreme Court justices should limit the application of the birthright citizenship order to 28 states and individuals not involved in ongoing cases.
Trump celebrates decision
President Trump celebrated the Supreme Court’s decision on his executive order against birthright citizenship, referencing that the 14th Amendment originally applied only to the children of slaves.
“BIG WIN at the United States Supreme Court! Even the birthright citizenship scam has been, indirectly, struck down. It has to do with the babies of slaves (same year!), not the FRAUD on our immigration process. Congratulations to our Attorney General Pam Bondi, and to Solicitor General John Sauer, and to the entire DOJ,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth.
Attorney General Pam Bondi also celebrated the justices’ decision and focused on lower courts’ injunctions against Trump’s policies.
“Today, the Supreme Court ordered district courts to stop the endless barrage of nationwide injunctions against President Trump,” she said. “This would not have been possible without the tireless work of our excellent lawyers @TheJusticeDept and our Solicitor General, John Sauer. This Department of Justice will continue to zealously defend @POTUS’s policies and his authority to implement them.”
Image: Opinion
