- Why Supreme Court oral arguments in birthright citizenship case did not go well for Trump CBS News —
- “It’s a New World. It’s the Same Constitution.” Slate —
- A President, the Supreme Court and a Landmark Citizenship Order Collide The New York Times —
- In Birthright Case, Trump’s Likely Loss May Not End the Fight The New York Times —
- John C. Calhoun Lives The Atlantic —
- In the Birthright Citizenship Hearing, a Story of Asians Fighting for Rights The New York Times —
- One of the Most Famous Trials in U.S. History Disproves Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Case Slate —
- Habitantes de Chicago reaccionan a los argumentos sobre la ciudadanía por nacimiento ante la Corte Suprema Chicago Sun-Times —
- Justice Jackson sparks online uproar after linking birthright citizenship to stealing a wallet in Japan Fox News —
- Trump elevates immigration fight at Supreme Court, turning up heat on Democrats ahead of midterms Fox News —
SCOTUS weighs birthright citizenship
The case marks a historic collision between executive authority and long-standing constitutional precedent.
Lawyers for the administration argued that the amendment was never intended to grant citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants.
However, several justices cited historical precedents, including cases involving Asian Americans in the 19th century, that appear to contradict the president's position.
A ruling against the order could significantly impact millions of families and set a major limit on presidential power over immigration policy.