What is the legal reasoning that 'allows' ending birthright citizenship?

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.