This is NOT Good….
Alito & Co. except for a early Immigration case?
Have consistently ruled 6-3 in FAVOR of Trump’s Wishes…..
Don’t matter is the thing is from the orignal Constition…
The court will determine if a Trump Order stopping birthright citizenship after Feb. 20, 2025 is NO LONGER in effect…*
Maybe…
This by order of Trump…
Not Congress….
An Appeals Court has denied Trump’s efcfort to enforce his policy change….
The Supreme do hearings and pass a judgment by the Spring it is believed….
(Roughly 250,000 babies were born to mothers who are in the country illegally or on a temporary basis in 2023…)
Trump’s policy IS ON HOLD by ordre of the District Judge AND the Circuit Appeals Court injections…
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments early next year in the challenge to President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship – the guarantee of citizenship to almost everyone born in the United States. Under the order, which has never gone into effect, people born in the United States would not be automatically entitled to citizenship if their parents are in this country either illegally or temporarily. The challengers argue that the order conflicts with both the text of the Constitution and the court’s longstanding case law.
…
The United States is one of roughly 30 countries, including Canada and Mexico, that offer automatic citizenship to nearly everyone born there. Birthright citizenship was added to the Constitution in 1868 when the 14th Amendment was adopted following the Civil War. The section of that amendment known as the citizenship clause provides that “[a]ll 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.” The amendment was intended to overrule one of the Supreme Court’s most notorious decisions, its 1857 ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford, holding that a Black person whose ancestors were brought to the United States and enslaved was not entitled to any protection from the federal courts because he was not a U.S. citizen.
In a related case in 1898, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wong Kim Ark, who was born in California to parents of Chinese descent. By a vote of 6-2, the court rejected the government’s argument that Wong Kim Ark was not a U.S. citizen, with Justice Horace Gray explaining that the 14th Amendment – although enacted to establish the citizenship of Black people – “affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens.”
…
In Barbara v. Trump, a federal district judge in New Hampshire issued a preliminary injunction that barred the Trump administration from enforcing the executive order against a class of babies born on or after Feb. 20, 2025, who are or would be denied U.S. citizenship by Trump’s order. And in Trump v. Washington, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the executive order “is invalid because it contradicts the plain language of the Fourteenth Amendment’s grant of citizenship to ‘all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’”…
…
On Friday afternoon, the court granted the Trump administration’s petition for review in the Barbara case. The justices apparently did not act on the administration’s petition for review in Trump v. Washington. If, as seems likely, the court does not take up that case, it will presumably remain on hold until the court issues its decision in the New Hampshire case.
The court also did not indicate that it intends to fast-track the Barbara case, which means that the justices will likely hear oral arguments in the spring, with a decision to follow by late June or early July….
*Things are a bit complicated….
The court has agreed to review the action’s of a Federal District judge which has put Trump’s citizenship denying policy on hold….
The court ALSO has a ruling from U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that ALSO denies Trump’s policy….
In todays move they are NOT dealling with that….
Again?
I’m no lawyer, but the court has frowned upon Disterict Courts enjoining the Trump admin from doing something Nationwise….
I’m kinnda confused why the court would accept this case ?
Is it about knocking the District judge?
If the Appeals Court ALSO says ‘No’ ?….why waste their time?
Just rule on if President Trump can write his own Birthright Policy ignoring the Constitution, the Courts, and existing law with a Presidential order?
I mean?
Why have a Supreme Court review ANYTHING a President decides?
We Rejected This Practice 60 Years Ago. We Must Do So Again Today.
Sixty years ago, the United States abolished immigration restrictions based on nationality alone. By 1965, such discrimination had become an embarrassment. In an emotional ceremony by the Statue of Liberty, President Lyndon B. Johnson declared that the legislation he was signing “corrects a cruel and enduring wrong” and makes Americans “truer to ourselves both as a country and as a people.”
Now the Trump administration is reviving nationality-based discrimination. After an Afghan refugee was arrested in the Nov. 26 shooting of two National Guard members, the Trump administration “indefinitely” stopped processing immigration-related applications for all Afghans — even those who have lived legally in the United States for years. The administration extended that suspension to immigrants from 18 other countries, including those on the verge of receiving green cards or citizenship. President Trump declared that Somalis are “garbage” on Tuesday, adding that they should “go back to where they came from,” and has threatened to denaturalize citizens. Meanwhile, his administration claims it can classify undocumented 14-year-old Venezuelans as “alien enemies” and deport them without judicial review…
…
As the Supreme Court explained when upholding Mr. Trump’s first travel ban back in 2018, the president has statutory authority to suspend entry into the United States based on national origin, at least for some period of time. But that does not permit him to deny visas, cancel green cards or denaturalize immigrants based on nothing more than their country of origin.
Without question, today’s antiquated immigration system is in need of a major overhaul. But we should never go back to a system that made collective judgments about the worthiness of specific nationalities to immigrate to the United States — particularly not based on an incident involving a single person.
In his 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson told the nation that it should ask prospective immigrants, “What can you do for our country?,” not “In what country were you born?” Johnson was right, whatever the Trump administration would like to believe.
More...NYT…