US Supreme Court justices will hear oral arguments starting Wednesday (April 1) on President Donald Trump’s attempt to limit first-born citizenship, a move that could reshape immigration law and affect millions of families across the United States.
A final decision is expected within three months. Until then, the policy remains suspended.
Trump’s executive order
At the heart of the case is an executive order titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” The order seeks to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the US to undocumented immigrants or parents on temporary visas after February 19, 2025.
“The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift,” the order said. “However, the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to anyone born in the United States.”
The administration says current interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment are flawed and have led to what it calls “destructive consequences.”
US Attorney General John Sauer said lower courts relied on a “flawed opinion” that undermined border security.
“These decisions grant, without legal justification, the privilege of American citizenship to hundreds of thousands of unqualified people,” Sauer said.
Critics call the move “unconstitutional”
Opponents, including the American Civil Liberties Union, say the order violates longstanding legal precedent and constitutional protections.
“The federal courts have unanimously ruled that President Trump’s executive order is unconstitutional,” said ACLU Legal Director Cecillia Wang. “We look forward to closing this issue once and for all.”
Legal experts warn the move could affect about 150,000 children born each year to non-citizen parents, along with millions already living in the US.
Amanda Frost of the University of Virginia warned that the policy could create widespread uncertainty.
“That child is born a non-citizen … denied all the benefits and privileges of citizenship and theoretically can be deported on the first day of their life,” she said.
Debate on constitutional meaning
The case hinges on the interpretation of a key phrase in the Fourteenth Amendment: “subject to its jurisdiction.”
The Trump administration says it allows the government to deny citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants. But critics say the landmark 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark has already settled the issue.
In that case, the court ruled that a child born in the US to foreign parents is a citizen, the foundation of modern citizenship.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor previously criticized the administration’s position, saying it “makes no sense at all” and could leave children stateless.
Practical and legal challenges
Several judges expressed concern about how the policy would work in practice.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh questioned how hospitals and states would determine a newborn’s citizenship status.
“What do hospitals do with a newborn? What do states do with a newborn?” he asked during earlier proceedings.
The administration says federal agencies would simply reject documents that incorrectly assign citizenship.
Immigration policy
The case is part of a broader set of legal battles over Trump’s second-term policies, including immigration enforcement and federal authority.
Proponents of the rule say it would curb abuses such as “birth tourism,” while critics warn it could create a fragmented civil rights system across states.
With the court’s decision expected in the coming months, the outcome could redefine the meaning of American citizenship and set a precedent for generations to come.
Read also | Trump shares letter from evangelist on ‘one way to heaven’
