Supreme Court to hear Trump birthright citizenship order case

CNBC ^ | 12/5/25 | Dan Mangum

[CFW]

And away we go!.......

[CFW]

Trump, President of U.S., et al. v. Barbara, et al. (more commonly Barbara v. Trump) is a landmark 2025 class-action lawsuit challenging President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship, alleging it violates the 14th Amendment by creating new conditions for citizenship beyond what the Constitution allows, leading to a federal judge issuing a nationwide injunction blocking the order’s enforcement for affected individuals.

Order list showing grant of cert here:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120525zr_hejm.pdf

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

And subject to the juristion therein.

[Shady]

I’m sure the Board at the Blackmail Bank of America is preparing the directive for John Roberts as we type.
“Born here, citizen here, because, that’s why.”
5-4.

[Whatever Works]

Anyone reading the original record and discussions in congress about this will IMMEDIATELY understand its original purpose was to give slaves full citizenship. It was NEVER intended to grant birthright citizenship and virtually no other western country allows for this. Oh, they all have borders too.

This reinterpretation needs to be corrected.

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Juristiction

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

Given the laws of other countries around the world regarding this issue, it would make logical sense for the Court to rule in Trump’s favor.

Ideally, if the Constitution wasn’t already clear on it, it should be something left up to the Congress. However, the Congress is made up in part of people who owe their election success to multitudes who were able to vote due to birthright citizenship. Circular process.

[CFW]

And subject to the jurisdiction therein.

---

That’s the key. And, if you read the documents from the time period in which the 14th Amendment was passed, you can clearly see that the Amendment was not intended to give citizenship to everyone whose mother made it across our borders before dropping a baby.

[C210N]

Also, from reading the documents from the time period, it should become very clear that citizenship is not intended for:

1. Mother’s who place personals in Hawaii journals for their baby announcements, and

2. Women who marry their brothers.

[dennisw]

The nine kangaroos are swinging into action. I suppose we will get their decision in May 2026.

FWIW —>>> The Court agreed to hear the appeal on December 5, 2025, with oral arguments likely set for early 2026 and a decision expected by late June or early July 2026, following the standard term timeline.​

[FlingWingFlyer]

I imagine the USA birthright vacation industry country will have thousands of lawyers lined up to make sure they can still make the big bucks setting up birthing vacations in the U.S. There’s a lot of money to be made by foreigners for the misunderstood, misread, dumbass 14th Amendment for retards.

[CFW]

2. Women who marry their brothers

---

It seems it would be a slam dunk for llhan Omar to be deported for immigration fraud. I know it would create a political firestorm but why should she get a pass just because Biden also brought in enough Somalians to elect her to the House. Those voting Somalians should be deported as well.

[1Old Pro]

if their parents were temporary visitors or illegal aliens.

Common sense - becoming a citizen thru the back door was NEVER supposed to be allowed.

[gloryblaze]

Wow. “By executive order” no less.

Oh, boy. “Away we go!” is right.

[frog in a pot]

It was NEVER intended to grant birthright citizenship...

Most significantly, the authors of the 14th A made that point abundantly clear. The contrary interpretations and application show how fragile our political system is.

[PIF]

Should the court rule in favor, then a lower court radical judge will immediately reverse it, citing racism and discrimination. 47 will honor the ruling and anchor babies will continue.

[MikelTackNailer]

Note how NBC worded this:
“will determine if President Donald Trump can undo automatic citizenship for people born in the United States.”

As if automatic citizenship via being born within our borders is written by God in stone, and Trump is the devil by defying that.

A country that won’t defend it’s borders is no longer worth defending. If the Supreme Court rules against they’ll effectively be ruling against justification for sitting there. They’ve already started sliding when they refused to crack down on the district judges trying to legislate and administrate from their little fiefdoms.

[Regulator]

Possible dodge they will use: that the President cannot clarify the 14th by an EO, only the Congress can do so.

Punt back to the politicians...who then sit on their hands.

[Sarah Barracuda]

What NBC fails to talk about is how you have these illegals coming here 9 months pregnant ready to pop out a kid just for the purpose of getting automatic citizenship and freebies for LIFE

[hanamizu]

And subject to the juristion therein.

---

Neither a lawyer nor constitutional scholar, but I would think that the fact that Indians (feather, not dot) did not receive birthright citizenship until 1924 would be a relevant argument regarding 14th Amendment birthright citizenship.