WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is urging the Supreme Court to uphold a controversial order that denies birthright citizenship to children born in the United States to parents who are illegally present or in the country temporarily. The appeal informs the Justices of the administration's position regarding the constitutional legitimacy of citizenship restrictions after lower courts blocked the order from taking effect.
The petition, shared with The Associated Press over the weekend, could lead to a significant ruling by the court as early as summer, determining whether these citizenship restrictions align with the Constitution. Notably, lower-court judges have consistently halted attempts by the administration to enforce these restrictions. The Justice Department did not request that the Supreme Court allow the restrictions to go into effect while the case is pending.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer stated, The lower court’s decisions invalidated a policy of prime importance to the president and his administration in a manner that undermines our border security, arguing that current rulings unfairly bestow citizenship rights on thousands deemed unqualified.
Cody Wofsy, representing affected children through the ACLU, denounced the executive order as blatantly unconstitutional, stating, No amount of maneuvering from the administration is going to change that. We will continue to ensure that no baby’s citizenship is ever stripped away by this cruel and senseless order.
The Trump administration's initiative, signed into effect at the beginning of his second term, attempts to clarify interpretations of the 14th Amendment, which has historically conferred citizenship to individuals born on U.S. soil, barring specific diplomatic or military exceptions. Multiple lower courts have determined that the initiative likely violates constitutional provisions, spurring the administration's appeal to a Supreme Court that has limited judges' use of nationwide injunctions but left the door open for future cases regarding broader citizenship rights. The administration is appealing two separate lower-court decisions that upheld ongoing challenges to the citizenship order and restricted its employment, while specifying the broader implications of these rulings across the United States.
The petition, shared with The Associated Press over the weekend, could lead to a significant ruling by the court as early as summer, determining whether these citizenship restrictions align with the Constitution. Notably, lower-court judges have consistently halted attempts by the administration to enforce these restrictions. The Justice Department did not request that the Supreme Court allow the restrictions to go into effect while the case is pending.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer stated, The lower court’s decisions invalidated a policy of prime importance to the president and his administration in a manner that undermines our border security, arguing that current rulings unfairly bestow citizenship rights on thousands deemed unqualified.
Cody Wofsy, representing affected children through the ACLU, denounced the executive order as blatantly unconstitutional, stating, No amount of maneuvering from the administration is going to change that. We will continue to ensure that no baby’s citizenship is ever stripped away by this cruel and senseless order.
The Trump administration's initiative, signed into effect at the beginning of his second term, attempts to clarify interpretations of the 14th Amendment, which has historically conferred citizenship to individuals born on U.S. soil, barring specific diplomatic or military exceptions. Multiple lower courts have determined that the initiative likely violates constitutional provisions, spurring the administration's appeal to a Supreme Court that has limited judges' use of nationwide injunctions but left the door open for future cases regarding broader citizenship rights. The administration is appealing two separate lower-court decisions that upheld ongoing challenges to the citizenship order and restricted its employment, while specifying the broader implications of these rulings across the United States.
