SC rejects Trump bid to restrict birthright citizenship
Clears way for transgender sports bans, strikes down curbs on coordinated campaign spending
Washington
Handing President Donald Trump a stinging defeat, the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected his audacious attempt to restrict birthright citizenship in the United States — a right long woven into the fabric of American society — scuttling one of his top priorities in his crackdown on immigration.
The 6-3 ruling marked the second time this year that the court has invalidated a major Trump initiative, following its February decision to strike down his sweeping global tariffs.
The justices upheld a lower court’s decision that blocked Trump’s executive order directing US agencies not to recognise the citizenship of children born in the US if neither parent is an American citizen or legal permanent resident, also called a “green card” holder.
Challengers to Trump’s order argued that it violates language in the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment that confers citizenship to those born in the United States who are “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.
Trump, who has repeatedly tested the limits of presidential power in domestic and foreign policy, issued the order last year on his first day back in office as part of a suite of policies to crack down on legal and illegal immigration. Critics have accused the Republican president of racial and religious discrimination in his approach to immigration.
The Supreme Court weighs in on what it means to be an American citizen just ahead of the July 4 holiday, when the US marks the 250th anniversary of its founding.
Ahead of the ruling, some experts had estimated that Trump’s directive could affect the legal status of as many as 250,000 babies born each year and could require the families of millions more to prove the citizenship status of their newborns.
A class-action suit
The legal challenge to Trump’s directive, considered by the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, involved a class-action lawsuit filed in New Hampshire by parents and children whose citizenship was threatened by the directive.
The 14th Amendment has long been interpreted as guaranteeing citizenship for babies born in the US, with only narrow exceptions such as the children of foreign diplomats or members of an enemy occupying force.
The provision at issue, known as the Citizenship Clause, states: “All persons born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
The administration has asserted that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means that being born in the US is not enough for citizenship, and excludes the babies of immigrants who are in the country illegally or whose presence is lawful but temporary, such as university students or those on work visas.
Citizenship is granted only to the children of those whose “primary allegiance” is to the US, including citizens and permanent residents, the administration has argued. Such allegiance is established through “lawful domicile”, which lawyers for the administration define as “lawful, permanent residence within a nation, with intent to remain”.
