Has he so often does, The YouTuber LeagalEagle just released an episode on this topic and in no uncertain terms shows just how in the bag the SCOTUS is for Trump’s policies. It’s really shocking just how badly the supreme court is whole on wrecking the rule of law in the US and they are being brazen about it.
Very much worth a watch even for people who really do not like watching YouTube anything.
(20 minutes long)
“Supposed to be” left the building when the people empowered to enforce the checks and balances decided not to do their jobs. That’s really it, that’s all there is. If Congress and the courts would step up and call bullshit on this, it would be dead in the water, but they just won’t do that.
Right, it’s a claim that “as we understand it this is what the law really always meant, so we’re just going to start enforcing based on this”.
The SCOTUS decision makes it so they can proceed to act that way and everyone who has some sort of problem with that has to go to their respective district/circuit courts to deal with it (so they can give themselves another year or two to have to actually decide it on the merits).
Well, TBF it has always been a legal construct rather than something tangible. As you point out it’s about what is the default-state presumption and what happens based on that.
A bigger concern, even, is what prevents this in the future from being made retroactive – it stands it applies only to those born after a certain date in 2025.
SCOTUS just agreed to hear the case. Since the lower courts have all shot down the executive orders, I can’t think of a reason for SCOTUS to take it up unless they plan to shoot down birthright citizenship, at least for some folks.
Talk me down from this, please!
Maybe in some extremely limited edge cases, but not the concept. That is my bet.
Can you name any? Like, born during a plane stopover or something? Why there must be ones of those that happen each year! Let’s throw the whole thing into doubt.
I am not by any means a backer of ending that Constitutional Right. I have read some critiques pointing out some of the more obscure edge cases, but I do not remember the reasoning. Children born to Diplomats are excluded, IIRC.
The whole thing is just a scare tactic to appease the bigots and xenophobes.
The scare tactic is going to the Supreme Court where they may overturn the case that made it clear that people born here are citizens.
It is not a case. It is a Constitutional Amendment.
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-14/
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.
SCOTUS can NOT overturn that basic law. Now, there is some quibbles about “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, “ but that is it.
That’s the problem - they could decide that anyone who doesn’t at least have a green card is not “subject to the jurisdiction”. I don’t think they will, for a lot of reasons but that’s what people are worried about.
And there was a case that made it clear that almost anyone born here (pretty much except the children of diplomats) is a citizen. Because someone decided that the US born child of Chinese immigrants was not a citizen when he tried to return to the US and he had to take the case to the Supreme Court ( Wong Kim Ark)
So they have diplomatic immunity?
There was a case, US vs. Wong Kim Ark, because the US claimed that Wong wasn’t a US citizen because his parents were subject of the Chinese emperor. Until then, it wasn’t clearly established that anyone born here (other than kids of diplomats, who really aren’t subject to local jurisdiction) were citizens.
SCOTUS could overturn that case and the administration can claim that anyone born of foreign parents not legally here isn’t a citizen. If they weren’t going to down that path, why take the case at all? The lower courts already rejected the administration’s claims.
Can they be arrested? Well obviously they can. trump has actually made his case worse.
OK, then why take the case at all? That’s why I reanimated this thread.
Perhaps to settle the matter definitively?
I have a hard time seeing the Supreme Court ruling against birthright citizenship.
This is a short read, hosted on the Heritage Foundation’s website, that summarizes the arguments they’ll be making in court (I assume).
It is just plain wrong to claim that the children born of parents temporarily in the country as students or tourists are automatically U.S. citizens: They do not meet the 14th Amendment’s jurisdictional allegiance obligations. They are, in fact, subject to the political jurisdiction (and allegiance) of the country of their parents. The same applies to the children of illegal aliens because children born in the United States to foreign citizens are citizens of their parents’ home country.
Federal law offers them no help either. U.S. immigration law (8 U.S.C. § 1401) simply repeats the language of the 14th Amendment, including the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
The State Department has erroneously interpreted that statute to provide passports to anyone born in the United States, regardless of whether their parents are here illegally and regardless of whether the applicant meets the requirement of being “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. Accordingly, birthright citizenship has been implemented by executive fiat, not because it is required by federal law or the Constitution.
They’re absolutely going to rule along that rationale, declare anyone who wasn’t born to citizens an illegal immigration, ramp up deportations even more.
So do I - I think they probably took it to make a definitive statement. If they were planning to allow the executive order to stand, I think they would have done so in the earlier case. It doesn’t make sense to get rid of nationwide injunctions and suggest that class actions are appropriate but not decide the ultimate issue unless you are planning to overturn the executive order.
For children born in the U.S., I don’t think they will go so far as to require that only children of U.S. citizens will be granted citizenship at birth, but I do think they will henceforth deny citizenship to children of anyone who is in the country illegally.
This isn’t always true, is it?
Not necessarily. It depends on the country. I believe that some countries require children born overseas to apply for citizenship (i.e. it is not automatic).