The US Supreme Court was depicted on October 9, 2024 (Photo: Jane Norman/State Newsroom)
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court announced Thursday that it will hear oral debate next month next month about President Donald Trump’s efforts to restructure birthright citizenship, but the judge has not yet decided on the merits of the case.
Instead, they choose whether to leave a national injunction from lower courts that have previously prevented the Trump administration from implementing its executive order.
Oral discussion, Scheduled for May 15thperhaps, it could indicate whether any of the nine justices are interested in reconsidering the court’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment ratified in 1868 after the Civil War.
The amendment states that “every person born or naturalized in the United States is subject to that jurisdiction and is a citizen of the United States and the state in which they live.”
The Supreme Court ruled in 1898. United States vs. Wong Kim Ark The 14th Amendment guarantees a child born in the United States, even if their parents are citizens, with the right to US citizens.
Trump opposed the verdict and signed it Presidential Order On his first day in the office, he is about to change whether a baby born in the US becomes a citizen. If the order is enforced, babies whose parents are “illegal but temporary” in their presence would not qualify for citizenship.
Some organizations and Democratic lawyers The lawsuit filed It attempts to block executive orders, leading to a nationwide injunction against its implementation.
Last month, the Trump administration I asked the Supreme Court It intervenes in the lower court’s national injunction and restricts them to the organizations and states that filed the lawsuit.
Three cases are Trump vs Washington State, Trump vs Casa, Inc. and Trump vs New Jersey.
law
National injunctions by lower court judges, like the Trump administration, have become a problem for Republicans in Congress.
Senator Chuck Grassley, Republican Senator Iowa The bill has been introduced Congress prohibits federal district court judges from implementing national injunctions.
“We must all agree to abandon the universal injunction as a weapon against policies that we disagree with,” Grassley said at a hearing earlier this month. “The damage that it causes to the justice system and our democracy is too great.”
