Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on Trump Plan to End Birthright Citizenship

The New York Times ^ | April 17, 2025 | Updated 3:44 p.m. ET | Abbie VanSickle

[E. Pluribus Unum]

The Trump administration had asked the justices to lift a nationwide pause on the policy as lower court challenges continue.

The Supreme Court announced on Thursday that it would hear arguments in a few weeks over President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship.

The brief order by the justices was unsigned and gave no reasoning, as is typical in such emergency cases. But the unusual move is a sign that the justices consider the matter significant enough that they would immediately hold oral argument on the government’s request to lift a nationwide pause on the policy.

The justices announced they would defer any consideration of the temporary block on the policy until they heard oral arguments, which they set for May 15.

That means that the executive order, which would end birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and foreign residents, will remain paused in every state while the court considers the case.

The order was the latest response to a series of emergency applications brought by the Trump administration to challenge lower court blocks on a number of policies, including efforts to freeze more than a billion dollars in foreign aid and the deportation of Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador without due process.

In three emergency applications, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to find that lower courts had erred in imposing bans on the birthright citizenship policy that extended beyond the parties involved in the litigation. It did not ask the court to weigh in on the constitutionality of that executive order, which was challenged soon after it was signed.

The court agreed to hear arguments on those applications, which focus on whether lower court...

[dljordan]

We’ed better send a big briefcase full of cash to the bank of Malta for Roberts.

[Dick Bachert]

WTF!! There should be NO QUESTION on this issue based on the TEXT in THIS GRAPHIC!

[Az Joe]

Let’s see who has balls to decide correctly.

[gloryblaze]

I wonder how much bearing this will have on President Trump’s other executive orders being challenged in selected venues and then being treated as federal cases throughout the whole big beautiful USA.

[faithhopecharity]

socalled birthright citizenship is in direct violation of the US Constitution, and this remains true no matter how the court may rule on it. our Founders worked hard to very carefully craft the constitutional provisions for citizenship as they were afraid of Great Britain or other foreign countries sending in enemy agents or those likely to grow up into enemy-sympathizers, via any form of automatic citizenship.

and while I expect the Supremes will rule property on this one, they absolutely need to clean up their act and start supporting our US Constitution on several other very important, key provisions like the 2A, the right of Americans not to be subject to unreasonable searches and seizures, and more. USSCt, please clean up your act!

.

[escapefromboston]

Since it would benefit all Americans and is the reasonable/logical decision there is no way the Supreme Court goes along with Trump

[DiogenesLamp]

Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on Trump Plan to End Birthright Citizenship

They are gonna bungle it.

[RetiredArmy]

I sure hope to hell we win this one. It would nail the dims in their love of illegals.

[lapsus calami]

 

 

socalled birthright citizenship is in direct violation of the US Constitution, and this remains true no matter how the court may rule on it. our Founders worked hard to very carefully craft the constitutional provisions for citizenship as they were afraid of Great Britain or other foreign countries sending in enemy agents or those likely to grow up into enemy-sympathizers, via any form of automatic citizenship.

 

Not only all that, but the strain on resources an unrestricted inflow would bring, the sort of unrest it would foster, along with the big terror concern of those times: disease. All of which are still legit concerns even to this day. No way was any language in the 14th amendment established as a fast track for legitimate immigration in this nation. It has been a twisted exploitation for an adverse political agenda and it's past time to correct and shut that down.

 

 

[mbrfl]

I do hope SCOTYS rules in Trump’s favor. But even if they don’t, there are things the administration can do, short of a change in the Constitution, that could severely limit birth tourism and anchor babies. Start by throwing the mother into U.S. prison for 5 years, minimum, followed by deportation.

[DugwayDuke]

gloryblaze wrote: “I wonder how much bearing this will have on President Trump’s other executive orders being challenged in selected venues and then being treated as federal cases throughout the whole big beautiful USA.”

This isn’t about the constitutionality of birthright citizens.
“In three emergency applications, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to find that lower courts had erred in imposing bans on the birthright citizenship policy that extended beyond the parties involved in the litigation. It did not ask the court to weigh in on the constitutionality of that executive order, which was challenged soon after it was signed.”

“The court agreed to hear arguments on those applications, which focus on whether lower court judges went too far in imposing a nationwide pause on the policy.”

[itsahoot]

This is how the Constitution get changed without a requirement to actually amend the Constitution.

God help us if they don’t read this amendment any better than they do the 2nd.

[cowboyusa]

Government Lawyers need to use that argument

[faithhopecharity]

Agreed fully. And the number of Islamonazi terrorists and their supporters that have gotten into USA is absolutely terrifying

[faithhopecharity]

Agreed fully. And the number of Islamonazi terrorists and their supporters that have gotten into USA is absolutely terrifying

[faithhopecharity]

Agreed fully. And the number of Islamonazi terrorists and their supporters that have gotten into USA is absolutely terrifying

[Jim Noble]

9-0 Constitutional Amendment required.

[I-ambush]

“9-0 Constitutional Amendment required”

Required to establish birthright citizenship, or abolish it?

[Jim Noble]

Required to abolish it.