NewKerala.com Logo

US Supreme Court to hear arguments next month on Trump's birthright citizenship plan

ANI April 18, 2025 206 views

The US Supreme Court will hear arguments next month on Trump's controversial birthright citizenship order. The case focuses on whether lower courts can issue nationwide injunctions against presidential policies. Trump's administration argues these injunctions hinder executive power, while opponents see them as necessary checks. The ruling could reshape how courts limit federal policies.

"Years of experience have shown that the Executive Branch cannot properly perform its functions if any judge anywhere can enjoin every presidential action everywhere." – Trump Administration"
Washington, DC, April 18: The US Supreme Court will hear arguments next month over President Donald Trump's plan to implement his executive order, which seeks to end the US citizenship right for some children born on American soil, Politico reported.

Key Points

1

Supreme Court to assess nationwide injunctions blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order

2

Case questions lower courts' power to halt presidential policies

3

Order challenges 14th Amendment's citizenship clause

4

Ruling could allow partial enforcement of Trump's policy

For now, the court is not formally analysing the constitutionality of Trump's attempt to end the right to birthright citizenship. Instead, the court will assess a more technical issue, but one that might have significant effects: the authority of lower court judges to issue broad injunctions that block a president's policies from being enforced across the nation.

Three federal judges separately issued nationwide injunctions against Trump's birthright citizenship order and said that the order breaches the 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to give citizenship to virtually anyone born on American soil.

Earlier in March, the Trump administration filed emergency appeals, requesting the judges to narrow or lift those injunctions. The administration contended that district judges have no power to issue rulings that block policies across the nation, Politico reported.

In an order issued on Thursday, the Supreme Court agreed to hold a special oral argument on May 15 regarding the question of district judges' power to issue such rulings. It is rare for the court to schedule arguments on emergency appeals, and the decision indicates that judges are taking the position of the Trump administration seriously.

If the court agrees with the Trump administration's argument that the judges overstepped their power, it would enable the government to start implementing its citizenship policy in some parts of the country.

Trump announced the policy to end the right to birthright citizenship in an executive order issued on the first day of his second term. The order seeks to deny US citizenship to children born on American soil to parents who are undocumented immigrants or who are in the country on short-term visas.

Many legal experts have said that the policy directly conflicts with the top court's precedent and the language of the 14th Amendment, which mentions that "all persons born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

Injunctions issued across the nation have stymied a broad spectrum of Trump administration policies since he assumed office for the second term on January 20.

Trump's Justice Department has contended that federal district judges should have the power to block policies only in the geographic district where the judge is located or regarding the people or groups that sued.

In the emergency appeal filed last month, the Trump administration wrote, "Years of experience have shown that the Executive Branch cannot properly perform its functions if any judge anywhere can enjoin every presidential action everywhere," Politico reported.

However, nationwide injunctions supporters have called them the only reasonable way to address the unlawful actions of the government.

Reader Comments

M
Michael T.
This is such an important case! The 14th Amendment is clear - birthright citizenship has been settled law for over a century. Can't just change it by executive order. Hope SCOTUS sees through this.
S
Sarah J.
Interesting legal question about nationwide injunctions though. Should one judge in California really be able to block policies for the entire country? πŸ€” There's valid arguments on both sides here.
R
Robert K.
While I generally support stricter immigration policies, this seems like an overreach. The Constitution is pretty clear on birthright citizenship. We should focus on fixing the legal immigration system instead.
A
Alicia P.
The 14th Amendment was written specifically to guarantee citizenship regardless of parentage. This policy would create a permanent underclass of non-citizens born here. That's not what America stands for! πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ
J
James L.
Respectfully, the article could do a better job explaining the technical legal question at hand. This isn't actually about birthright citizenship yet - it's about judicial authority. Two very different things.
T
Tina M.
The amount of nationwide injunctions under this administration is unprecedented. Whether you agree with the policies or not, that does seem like a problem worth examining. Courts shouldn't be making policy.
D
David R.
Can we just appreciate how rare it is for SCOTUS to schedule special arguments like this? Shows they recognize the significance of the judicial power question, regardless of the underlying policy.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Your email won't be published

Disclaimer: Comments are the opinions of users and not of this website or it's staff. News stories are provided by news agencies. We do not guarantee their accuracy. Inappropriate content may be removed. By posting, you agree to our terms.

You May Like!