Posted on 02/19/2026 9:52:38 PM PST by CFW
(The Center Square) - The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on April 1 over whether to uphold birthright citizenship in the United States.
Trump v. Barbara challenges President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20, 2025, executive order that denies birthright citizenship to children in the U.S. born after Feb. 19, 2025, whose parents are either illegally present or temporary residents of the United States.
The case has far-reaching consequences and could fundamentally redefine the 14th amendment, an addendum to the U.S. Constitution that provided citizenship to formerly enslaved African Americans. Legal analysts said much interpretation of the 14th Amendment has shaped current immigration law in the United States.
The concept of birthright citizenship primarily rests on a Supreme Court interpretation of the 14th Amendment to include children born in the United States to foreign parents. The 14th Amendment reads: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Steven Menashi, a judge on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, said the case will rely on the justices interpretation of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” He said the clause refers to being born under the protection of and owing allegiance to a sovereign.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecentersquare.com ...
SCOTUS ping!
The Supreme Court is just too political to rule favorably in this case and too many birthright citizens exist.
Expect the Trump team to really reinforce the invasion clause of the 14th because what we have seen over the last 35 years is a literal organized invasion of our country by birthright tourist illegal aliens who come here to have anchor babies at the expense of the us taxpayer
“I suspect that the the Trump team is going to lose this one”
Just ignore SCOTUS and de-naturalize any latin americans and deport them and every illegal and every child and grandchild of the illegals, the leftists will not follow the law so why should we?
The Supreme Court takes off 3 months a year totally. Then it is typically in session to hear oral arguments 3 days a week—Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday—during their two-week sitting cycles from October through April. The Court convenes at 10 a.m. on these days, with additional private conferences on Fridays to discuss cases.
Side point: Right now we are in the 10 days off for the House and Senate despite the shutdown votes needed. Many hard working Americans would like the soft schedules the judges and politicians have on our dime. 🛏️🛋️
Unfortunately I think you are right. The replacement demographic plus Mayorkas style lawlessness plus stubborn misinterpretation of the 14th wins and they don't care.
The supreme court Justices have to realize that if they don’t rule that birthright citizenship is not constitutional for what Trump’s wants. They will be one of 25 supreme court Justices. They’re opinions won’t mean anything.
Not considering that the country will turn in Muslim state.
I’m figuring they will go King Solomon on this one and split the baby. They will deny Pres. Trump’s executive order but say Congress can put “reasonable” limits on anchor babies, as the original intent was to enfranchise former slaves, not Chinese birthing tourists.
I agree. The Supreme Court will say the President can’t define “subject to the jursidiction” but Congress can. If Con gress defines what “subject to the jursidiction” then Trump may get what he wants: limits of birthright citizenship.
A Chinese oligarch has been sending pregnant Chinese women to the US.
Those children are now old enough to vote in US elections. (And they’ll be voting from mainland Red China...)
If congress wants to get rid of certain kinds of filibusters they could try that. Warning, it would not take many senators with an R after their names to torpedo the process.
A Chinese oligarch has been sending pregnant Chinese women to the US.
Those children are now old enough to vote in US elections. (And they’ll be voting from mainland Red China...)
Now you see why the Democrats are so fanatical about mail in ballots.
The Great Replacement is one of the more important policies of the West for decades now. There is no way the Supreme Court tries to slow that down.
STOP THIS MADNESS!!! Unless ONE PARENT is an AMERICAN, NO CITIZENSHIP FOR THE BABY!!
It’s not redefining anything. The 14th was NEVER ever meant to allow anchor babies.
All illegal aliens, including their illegal democrat anchor babies need to be immediately deported. Looking straight at you:
Kamala Harris (from India-Jamaica)
Joy Reid (from Congo-Guyana)
Mika Brzezinski the adulterous (from Poland-Switzerland)
April 1st...quite telling.
Someone should remind Mr. Rice that U.S. Citizenship isn’t based on the feudal concept of allegiance to the sovereign at
birth, but consent to be governed.
You may be right - but the existence of other “birthright citizens” has no real bearing since he is allowing grandfathering and starting with a “after Feb. 19, 2025” date.
They may split the baby by determining illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, but legal visa travelers are since we let them in.
This could then be solved by placing visa restrictions that specifically deny citizenship to babies born to legal travelers. Overstays and invaders would be completely out of luck and the anchor baby problem is solved.
EC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.