
Trump urges SCOTUS to review birthright citizenship case
By Craig Nigrelli (Anchor), Brock Koller (Senior Producer), Shea Taylor (Producer), Jake Larsen (Video Editor)
- The Trump administration has sought Supreme Court intervention to lift nationwide injunctions blocking an executive order ending birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. The order, signed on Trump’s first day, limits citizenship to those with at least one U.S. citizen or legal resident parent.
- Three federal judges issued injunctions, citing conflict with the 14th Amendment.
- A Supreme Court decision could impact birthright citizenship, federal court power and presidential authority in immigration enforcement.
Full Story
The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift a nationwide pause on its executive order ending birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants and foreign residents. The legal battle could determine the future of a long-standing constitutional principle established by the 14th Amendment.
Media Landscape
See how news outlets across the political spectrum are covering this story. Learn moreBias Summary
- The Trump administration requested the Supreme Court to allow plans to end birthright citizenship amid lower court opposition, challenging a legal theory that has been dismissed by many courts.
- The Trump administration contends that the nationwide injunctions against its executive order represent an overreach by the courts.
- The Justice Department stated that these universal injunctions prevent an executive order from being enforced across the country, affecting hundreds of thousands without proper identification.
- For over 150 years, courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment to guarantee citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., despite some conservative challenges to this understanding.
- The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to permit restrictions on birthright citizenship to partially take effect while legal battles continue.
- This request targets court orders from judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington that blocked President Donald Trump's citizenship order issued after he began his second term.
- The order would deny citizenship to children born after Feb. 19, 2025, to parents in the country illegally and prevent U.S. agencies from recognizing their citizenship.
- The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to allow restrictions on birthright citizenship to take effect during ongoing legal disputes.
- The executive order aims to deny citizenship to children born after Feb. 19, 2025, to parents in the country illegally, but has faced opposition from roughly two dozen states and several groups.
- Roughly two dozen states and several groups have sued, claiming the order violates the Constitution's 14th Amendment, which promises citizenship to those born in the U.S.
- Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argues that the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause does not extend citizenship universally, asking the court to dismiss the cases against the order.
Bias Comparison
Bias Distribution
Left
Untracked Bias
What is the Trump administration arguing?
Lawyers representing the Trump administration contended that lower courts overstepped their authority by issuing nationwide injunctions against the executive order. The administration argued that courts should only block policies for the specific plaintiffs involved in each lawsuit, rather than issuing broad rulings that apply nationwide.
Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris has urged the Supreme Court to narrow the injunctions, allowing the administration to enforce the policy in states that did not challenge it.
The Supreme Court justices can now weigh in on the increasing use of nationwide injunctions.

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
How do courts interpret the 14th Amendment?
The 14th Amendment states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”
The Supreme Court upheld this principle in the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark. The case affirmed that nearly all children born on U.S. soil automatically receive citizenship.
However, the Trump administration and some conservative legal scholars argued that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes the children of undocumented immigrants and foreign residents.
Federal judges in lower courts have consistently rejected this interpretation. One judge called the executive order “blatantly unconstitutional.”
What happens if the Supreme Court sides with Trump?
If upheld, the policy would strip birthright citizenship from thousands of children born in the U.S. to non-citizen, non-resident parents.
The decision could create legal uncertainty, leading to challenges over immigration status, deportation proceedings and retroactive citizenship claims.
Critics warned that the move could disrupt the legal foundation of U.S. citizenship and create a precedent for future restrictions.
Advocates claim birthright citizenship has been misinterpreted, advocating its restriction to individuals with formal U.S. legal affiliations.
Get up to speed on the stories leading the day every weekday morning. Sign up for the newsletter today!
Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
What are the broader implications?
Beyond birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court’s decision could reshape how lower courts handle nationwide injunctions. If the justices rule in favor of limiting injunctions, it could make it harder for courts to block presidential policies nationwide, affecting future challenges on immigration, healthcare and other federal actions.
The case is expected to be a major legal test for the Trump administration’s immigration policies, which have faced repeated legal challenges since the president took office.
The Supreme Court will first decide whether to limit the injunctions while the case progresses.
[craig nigrelli]
THE LEGAL BATTLE OVER WHETHER TO END BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES IS HEADED TO THE SUPREME COURT.
LAWYERS FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP ASKED THE SUPREME COURT ON THURSDAY TO LIFT A NATIONWIDE PAUSE ON THE PRESIDENT’S ORDER ENDING BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP FOR THE CHILDREN OF UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS AND FOREIGN RESIDENTS.
Critics of the president’s order including LEGAL EXPERTS SAY it VIOLATES THE 14-TH AMENDMENT THAT GRANTS ANYONE BORN IN THE UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP.
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ARGUES LOWER COURTS WENT **TOO FAR** IN HANDING DOWN NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS BLOCKING THE POLICY.
ACTING SOLICITOR GENERAL SARAH HARRIS WANTS THE COURT TO LIMIT LOWER COURT INJUNCTIONS TO INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS THAT SUED OVER TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER — AND POTENTIALLY TO PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE DEMOCRATIC-LED STATES THAT CHALLENGED IT, AS WELL.
MEANTIMES, — THE PRESIDENT REPORTEDLY IS EXPECTED TO INVOKE A LITTLE-KNOWN 18TH-CENTURY LAW THAT WOULD SPEED UP HIS MASS DEPORTATION PLEDGE..
THE ALIEN ENEMIES ACT OF 17-98 GIVES THE PRESIDENT AUTHORITY TO DETAIN OR DEPORT THE NATIVES AND CITIZENS OF AN ENEMY NATION.
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WOULD USE THE LAW TO TARGET MEMBERS OF THE VIOLENT VENEZUELAN GANG TREN DE ARAGUA — WHICH THE PRESIDENT DESIGNATED A FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION ON HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE.
<p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p><p>The U.S. has invoked the law three times — all during wartime — with the last time happening during World War 2.
Media Landscape
See how news outlets across the political spectrum are covering this story. Learn moreBias Summary
- The Trump administration requested the Supreme Court to allow plans to end birthright citizenship amid lower court opposition, challenging a legal theory that has been dismissed by many courts.
- The Trump administration contends that the nationwide injunctions against its executive order represent an overreach by the courts.
- The Justice Department stated that these universal injunctions prevent an executive order from being enforced across the country, affecting hundreds of thousands without proper identification.
- For over 150 years, courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment to guarantee citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., despite some conservative challenges to this understanding.
- The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to permit restrictions on birthright citizenship to partially take effect while legal battles continue.
- This request targets court orders from judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington that blocked President Donald Trump's citizenship order issued after he began his second term.
- The order would deny citizenship to children born after Feb. 19, 2025, to parents in the country illegally and prevent U.S. agencies from recognizing their citizenship.
- The Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court to allow restrictions on birthright citizenship to take effect during ongoing legal disputes.
- The executive order aims to deny citizenship to children born after Feb. 19, 2025, to parents in the country illegally, but has faced opposition from roughly two dozen states and several groups.
- Roughly two dozen states and several groups have sued, claiming the order violates the Constitution's 14th Amendment, which promises citizenship to those born in the U.S.
- Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argues that the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause does not extend citizenship universally, asking the court to dismiss the cases against the order.
Bias Comparison
Bias Distribution
Left
Untracked Bias
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.