Trump’s quest to gut birthright citizenship heads to the Supreme Court this week. A single question — and simple logic — stands in his way.
If a person is subject to the jurisdiction of both the United States and Mexico, are they subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?in 1868, a few years after the Civil War: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.
” Ever since then, it has been broadly understood to mean that a child born here is a U.S. citizen, regardless of the parents’ status and with only the slimmest of exceptions. The doctrine originally served theof ensuring citizenship for the children of recently freed Black slaves — and the distinctly American ethic that the status of the parent need not restrict the child.bearing the Orwellian title “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” that would vastly reduce the scope of Birthright Citizenship . Under Trump’s construction, a child born in the U.S. would automatically become a citizen only if at least one parent was present in the U.S. legally or permanently. A child born here to parents without legal status would not become a citizen. Nor would a child born in the U.S. to parents with temporary legal status —Trump’s executive order turns entirely on the meaning of the constitutional phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The administration hasto the courts that, if a noncitizen living in the U.S. is also a citizen of, say, Mexico , then that person is subject to the jurisdiction ofcountries — hence not “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” . The illogic is plain, of course. If I’m holding two things at once — let’s say a baseball in one hand and a football in the other — then I am indeed holding a baseball; holding the football in the other hand doesn’t somehow cancel out the baseball. And if the Constitution meant what Trump’s lawyers claim it means, it would have an extra word: “subjectIndeed, a Mexican-born parent living illegally in the U.S. is unquestionably “subject to the jurisdiction of” this country. He certainly could be arrested and imprisoned in the U.S., for example — “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” to use the constitutional language. So, too, could that person be taxed by the U.S. government, or regulated, or questioned, or ticketed, or any of the other things the government does to people who live here. Imagine a scenario where a federal law-enforcement agent tried to arrest a Mexican-born person inside the U.S. and that person responded, “Sorry, sir. I am physically here in the U.S., but I’m also a Mexican citizen, so therefore I’m not subject to your jurisdiction, according to the president.” Wouldn’t fly, would it?born here is a citizen here, period; the person must also be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” and that phrase therefore must exclude, which has been accepted by every court to consider the issue so far, is that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” does indeed serve to exclude certain extremely narrow categories of people who are altogether outside the reach of the U.S. government: the children of foreign diplomats or invading hostile armies, for example. Read that way, every word of the 14th Amendment’s birthright-citizenship clause has a purpose and makes perfect sense.have rebuffed the president’s attempt to rewrite the Constitution and U.S. history, and the Courts of Appeals for the First, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits haveTrump’s executive order “blatantly unconstitutional.” The veteran jurist noted, “I have been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear.” After more than a year of litigation across the country, the Trump administration is batting exactly .000. When the Supreme Court hears oral argument on birthright citizenship on Wednesday, expect the justices and the advocates to converse on all manner of deep legalese. But in the end it comes down to the simple proposition that if a person has two things at once, he also has one of them; if a person is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. and Mexico, he is indeed subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. and therefore covered by the 14th Amendment. The law and logic are clear enough here that I’d expect conservative Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett ultimately to join their three liberal colleagues and rule against Trump and in favor of our long-accepted notion of birthright citizenship. It’s tough to predict Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito whenever Trumpian politics are involved, but even they might be persuaded given the clarity of the legal issue at hand. The only real drama remaining is whether the Supreme Court will reject Trump’s position seven-to-two or unanimously.Trump’s Losing War Against the Federal ReserveChas Danner Is the minor excursion very complete, ending in a couple weeks, or just beginning? Here’s the latest on what Trump feels in his bones.The U.S. Army was investigating why an Apache helicopter was hovering outside Kid Rock’s White House–style home in Tennessee.March has been a bad month for the president in the polls with his Iran war and its economic effects having a clear impact on his popularity.The president said he’s “so busy” fighting wars. But that didn’t stop him from breaking out the props to defend his precious ballroom.As thousands of troops deploy to the region, the Pentagon is reportedly preparing for weeks of ground operations. Here’s what we know.The Speaker blew up a Senate bill reopening DHS because he didn’t want to wind up like Kevin McCarthy, who was ousted by the Freedom Caucus.Wait times appeared to be easing at U.S. airports on Monday with workers set to receive their first paychecks since the DHS shutdown began weeks ago.With 36 states holding gubernatorial elections in November, there’s a good chance a midterms Democratic wave could hit down-ballot too.He’ll probably never admit it was his mistake, but if he wants to pin it on others, here’s who he might pick.The U.S. treasurer said this unprecedented honor is “well deserved” because Trump has led us into a “golden age economic revival.”The Senate has agreed to end the airport chaos and put off the ICE fight. But Trump could still change his mind, and House GOP hard-liners may revolt.Rex Heuermann, who was arrested in 2023, is expected to admit to the seven murders he has been charged with during a court appearance next month.A new poll shows Platner leading Governor Janet Mills by 27 points, a sign that the oyster farmer is still in firm control of the Maine primary.New York
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Cardinals Must Ignore Biggest Trade AssetThere's no reason why the Arizona Cardinals should move off this star — yet.
Read more »
Find Familiar Spirits Unveils Quest's End Wizard Irish WhiskeyFind Familiar Spirits announced the latest addition to their line of Quest's End Whiskey, as the new Wizard spirit will bring out an Irish Whiskey to the group.
Read more »
Francis Mauigoa set to join Jets brother in completing unlikely quest from American Samoa to NFLFrancis is expected to be a top 10 pick and the first offensive tackle selected in the 2026 draft, joining Kiko (a Jets 2025 fifth-round pick) in the journey from the Ili’ili village of about 3,000…
Read more »
UConn's stunning March Madness comeback delivered the ultimate St. John's gut punchUConn 73, Duke 72 just 48 hours after Blue Devils 80, St. John’s 75 matters more than the consecutive Big East Tournament titles that Rick Pitino’s group won.
Read more »
Bone Broth Vs. Chicken Broth: A Doctor and Dietitian Explain Which Is Better for Gut HealthExperts explain the key differences between bone broth vs. chicken broth for gut health, including which soothing broth may better support digestion.
Read more »
How ultra-processed foods affect our gut microbiomeThe additives added to processed food to keep it fresher for longer might be having an unexpected effect on the health of the microbes in our guts.
Read more »