The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard a central case in American identity concerning birthright citizenship, a right that President Donald Trump seeks to abolish as part of his war on illegal immigration. Trump signed an executive order during his second term stating that children born to parents residing in the U.S. illegally or on temporary visas will not automatically become U.S. citizens. Lower courts struck down this decision as unconstitutional, ruling that under the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, anyone born on American soil is considered a U.S. citizen. The amendment states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." This does not apply to individuals not under U.S. jurisdiction, such as foreign diplomats and Native American tribes. In response to a question on Tuesday about the court session, Trump told reporters, "I will be attending." Trump had previously attended ceremonies for his nominees to the Supreme Court, such as Neil Gorsuch in 2017 shortly after taking office. However, a sitting president attending oral arguments in a case involving his current administration is an exceptional event. The Trump administration argues that the 14th Amendment, passed after the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865), pertains to the citizenship rights of freed slaves, not the children of illegal immigrants or temporary visitors. Trump's executive order is based on the idea that anyone in the U.S. illegally or on a visa is not subject to the jurisdiction of the state and thus cannot automatically gain citizenship. The Supreme Court rejected this narrow definition in a 1898 case involving a man named Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco in 1873 to Chinese immigrant parents. After a trip to China, Wong Kim Ark was denied entry to the U.S. in 1895 under Chinese exclusion laws. However, the Supreme Court ruled he was a U.S. citizen by birthright. Stephen Scheiner, a law professor at the University of Illinois Chicago, said it is likely the court will reject the challenge to birthright citizenship. Scheiner told AFP that "this is a court that has long relied on history and traditions as a primary reference for understanding the Constitution." Trump has appointed three of its justices. Trump's Attorney General, John Sauer, stated that to be eligible for citizenship, a person must be "born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction." Sauer added in a court filing that "children of aliens who are temporary or illegal residents are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." And "no person is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States unless they owe sufficient allegiance and can claim its protection." Sauer argued that automatic birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants "provides a strong incentive for illegal immigration," encouraging what is known as "birth tourism." If the Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship, it would be Trump's second major defeat during his term, after judges struck down most of his tariffs in February. Trump reacted angrily to this ruling, calling birthright citizenship "one of the biggest scams of our time" on Tuesday, a day after a social media post criticizing "stupid judges." The American Civil Liberties Union, which is defending birthright citizenship in court, stated that the Trump administration "is asking for nothing less than a rewriting of the constitutional foundations of our nation." It added that "the government's frivolous arguments, if accepted, will cast a shadow over the citizenship of millions of Americans for generations." A decision in the case is expected by late June or early July. "It would be somewhat surprising to learn after 150 years that we have been applying the citizenship clause completely wrong." Conservatives have a supermajority in the Supreme Court (6-3).
