Trump Administration Seeks Supreme Court Review on Executive Order

On Friday, the Trump administration requested the U.S. Supreme Court to evaluate an executive order issued by President Donald Trump. This move follows a class action lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Alliance Group in New Hampshire, highlighting ongoing legal disputes that trace back to the Reconstruction era.

The core issue at hand involves the future recognition of citizenship for nearly all children born on U.S. soil, a right established by the 1898 Supreme Court case, United States vs. Wong Kim Ark. The implications are significant; they could alter the citizenship interpretation outlined in the 14th Amendment, which has traditionally guaranteed citizenship to almost every child born in the U.S., regardless of their parents’ immigration status.

The federal court of appeals is now tasked with examining Trump’s order regarding birthright citizenship and will clarify the specifics behind its enforcement.

Trump’s directive aims to restrict citizenship to children of American citizens and lawful permanent residents, which, if upheld, could deny automatic citizenship to numerous children born in the country annually.

In the Wong Kim Ark case, the ruling determined that a man born in San Francisco to parents who were barred from naturalization was still an American citizen under the 14th Amendment. This established the principle of “jus soli,” meaning citizenship is granted by virtue of being born on U.S. territory, with limited exceptions for diplomats and others.

Critics, including UC Berkeley law professor John Yu, argue against Trump’s order, emphasizing that the history and wording of the law are clear. Yu cites that the framers of the 14th Amendment adopted the British “jus soli” tradition and included former enslaved individuals and their descendants as citizens.

The order has faced significant pushback, with another federal appeals judge blocking it in a recent ruling.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissenting opinion, suggested that class action lawsuits could be an effective way for challengers to proceed: “I recommend parents of children affected by citizenship orders to quickly file a class action lawsuit… lower courts should respond swiftly.”

The new ACLU lawsuit in New Hampshire aligns with this approach. ACLU lawyer Cody Wofsy remarked, “All courts that have encountered this cruel order agree it’s unconstitutional. We aim to prevent President Trump from infringing on the civil rights of any child.”

Furthermore, Devon Chaffey, executive director of ACLU-NH, added, “This executive order contradicts the constitution, our values, and our history, potentially creating a lasting underclass.” Carla McCanders of the Legal Defense Fund described it as “an illegal attempt to establish racial hierarchies,” asserting, “Citizenship is not a privilege; it’s a right granted by birth.”

Comments from the White House, ACLU, and its partner organizations are currently being sought.