On April 1, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will hear oral argument for the most significant immigration cases presented before the Court in years. At issue is President Trump’s attempt to restrict birthright citizenship by way of executive order. While this may sound legalistic, this issue affects real families. Specifically, this case centers on a simple question with life-altering implications: When a child is born in the United States, is that child automatically a U.S. citizen? For generations, the answer has been pretty clearly yes. This understanding is based on the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which has been understood to confer citizenship on nearly all individuals born in the United States. The government has been challenging this definition. SCOTUS will reach a decision by June 30, 2026.
Background
Much of the media coverage has rightly focused on the Constitution. The administration has argued that the 14th Amendment does not confer citizenship on children born in the United States to parents who are here illegally or only temporarily. However, there is also a federal statute that comes into play. Specifically, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 provides that “every person born in the United States” and subject to its jurisdiction “shall be a citizen of the United States.”
This fact presents a very big problem for the Trump administration. Generally speaking, the Supreme Court likes to decide cases on statutory grounds, rather than reach constitutional questions. That means that the Supreme Court could rule that the plain language of the 1952 law alone defeats the Trump administration’s arguments, without ever having to reach the larger constitutional question. If that happens, President Trump could attempt to request that Congress amend or rewrite the law. However, Congress has had such legislation before it for years but refused to pass any such legislation.
Impact
The practical implications of the President’s argument also worry many legal experts. While the executive order Trump issued was stated to be prospective in nature (meaning that it would apply only to babies born after a future date), many legal experts have argued that if the President’s theory is accepted then the impact would not be prospective only. Rather, millions of people who were previously considered U.S. citizens could find their citizenship status questioned after the fact. This could impact their ability to vote, obtain a passport, qualify for government benefits, and confirm their legal status in other ways. The ripple effect would be chaos.
At its core, this case isn’t really about legal theory. For families, this case is about predictability of the law. This case is about whether a child born in the United States can grow up knowing for certain what he or she is and is not under U.S. law. This case also decides whether the government can end longstanding definitions of citizenship via executive order. Or whether changes to such a fundamental issue must be left to the Constitution and Congressional action.
As always, ILBSG actively monitors ongoing U.S. immigration news. If you have questions about any U.S. immigration related issue, contact us. Working with an experienced attorney ensures you get the right advice based on the most recent laws. In an ever-evolving immigration policy landscape, it’s particularly critical you get the right advice.