Posted on 06/27/2025 8:59:26 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court on Friday ruled that individual judges lack the authority to grant nationwide injunctions, but the decision left unclear the fate of President Donald Trump’s restrictions on birthright citizenship.
The outcome was a victory for the Republican president, who has complained about individual judges throwing up obstacles to his agenda. He called it a “monumental victory.”
But a conservative majority left open the possibility that the birthright citizenship changes could remain blocked nationwide. Trump’s order would deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of people who are in the country illegally.
The cases now return to lower courts, where judges will have to decide how to tailor their orders to comply with the high court ruling, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the majority opinion.
The justices agreed with the Trump administration, as well as President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration before it, that judges are overreaching by issuing orders that apply to everyone instead of just the parties before the court.
In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, “The court’s decision is nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the Constitution.” This is so, Sotomayor said, because the administration may be able to enforce a policy even when it has been challenged and found to be unconstitutional by a lower court.
Birthright citizenship automatically makes anyone born in the United States an American citizen, including children born to mothers in the country illegally. The right was enshrined soon after the Civil War in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
In a notable Supreme Court decision from 1898, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the court held that the only children who did not automatically receive U.S. citizenship upon...
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
and just like that, the judicial insurrection was put down.
“including children born to mothers in the country illegally”
No it doesn’t. That’s simply an interpretation pushed by the State department for the last few decades.
It’s never actually been adjudicated. The Court seems terrified of taking and deciding such a case.
So that’s why Trump issued the EO: it’s a modification of the State Department interpretation. Since he’s responsible for the State Department, it’s his authority to do so.
Absent either a more definitive SCOTUS ruling or a law passed in Congress, or even an amendment to the Constitution , that’s the way it stays until a subsequent President wants to change it.
“Divided”: the SCOTUS versus the democrats
SCOTUS rules democrats cannot continue to run the country through their inferior court federal judges when they fail to steal an election.
Democrat Wojacks seethe.
Written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
Too bad, Freeper haters!
No it wasn't.
This is to be celebrated but I would temper that with the expectation that the Court will probably strike down the EO and uphold birthright citizenship.
Chinese in late term fly here to have their child, then fly back to China.
Birthright citizenship is ridiculous.
Put down by Justice Barrett and her sane colleagues
“The right was enshrined soon after the Civil War ... “
No. The 13th, 14th and 15th amendments—or “Civil War amendments”—were passed to protect newly freed slaves.
Period.
That was my thought as well.
I sense the substance of what the court has done by limiting district judges’ decisions to the party in front of them, be it an individual or state, is restricting it to the individual or the environs of the state and forces them to appeal their legal issue to the 9 judges on the Supreme Court which does have national exposure. It limits lawfare at the district court level by one activist judge to legislate for the nation.
Exactly, the law only required it for children of green card holders, every thing else was just policy. The president can change policy whenever he wants.
We loved it during Biden’s term. We always got justice Matthew Kaczmarek from North Texas to stop all the crap from Biden EOs.
And make sure, on these sweeping declarations, to cross your eyes and dot your tees.
The other point that rarely gets brought up is the fact that foreign diplomats birthing children in the US are not granted US citizenship. The parents are not US citizens therefore their children born here also are excluded. Illegal immigrants and foreign diplomats appear to me, to be exactly the same in this case.
LOL. Looking for that small silver lining in the massive black cloud that just floated over the liberal insurrection.
Also as noted in the Red State post, Justice Barrett nuked Ketanji from orbit.
Amy called out Ketanji in her opinion!
AP - All Pablum
Well, we have to keep the Asian birthright vacations alive or the children in Africa will all starve to death and all “unaccompanied” illegal alien females will be born in Mexico with cancer and have to move to the United States to be treated.
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.