Trump Takes Birthright Citizenship Battle to the Supreme Court

President Donald Trump has escalated his long-standing effort to end birthright citizenship by taking the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court.

His executive order, signed on his first day in office, aimed to strip citizenship from children born on American soil to parents who are in the country illegally or on temporary student, work, or tourist visas.

However, this order faced immediate legal hurdles, as federal district courts in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington state swiftly blocked its implementation.

Birthright citizenship is firmly established in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that anyone born in the United States is automatically a citizen. Trump’s executive order directly challenges this principle, sparking intense legal debates and widespread opposition.

In an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, the Justice Department has requested that the scope of the lower court injunctions be narrowed.

Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris emphasized that this was a “modest” request, stopping short of seeking a constitutional ruling on the matter. Instead, she argued that the broad, nationwide injunctions should be limited to only the specific plaintiffs involved in the cases.

READ ALSO: Canada Files WTO Complaint Over US Tariffs on Steel and Aluminium

“Those universal injunctions prohibit a Day 1 Executive Order from being enforced anywhere in the country,” Harris wrote.

“While the parties litigate weighty merits questions, the Court should restrict the scope of multiple preliminary injunctions that purport to cover every person in the country, limiting those injunctions to parties actually within the courts’ power.”

This legal challenge is just one of many hurdles Trump has encountered in his broader push to curb illegal immigration, cut government spending, and downsize the federal workforce. His efforts have faced resistance in courts across the country, with rulings frequently halting or modifying his policies.

In a separate legal setback, a federal district judge in California ruled on Thursday that six federal agencies must reinstate thousands of probationary employees who had been let go as part of a sweeping reduction in the federal workforce. This ruling underscores the continued legal pushback against Trump’s executive actions, signaling an uphill battle for his policy agenda.

The Supreme Court’s response to the Justice Department’s request could have significant implications for Trump’s immigration policies and the broader legal landscape surrounding executive authority. While the request currently focuses on limiting the scope of lower court rulings, the broader question of whether birthright citizenship can be restricted by executive order remains a major constitutional debate.