Supreme Court backs Trump on birthright citizenship injunctions. Here's what that means:
What happened?
Ruling along ideological lines 6–3, the court's conservative majority decided to curb injunctions from the lower courts that temporarily paused President Donald Trump's plan to end automatic birthright citizenship via Executive Order 14160, which aims to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country illegally, on temporary visas, or not 'lawful permanent residents' at the time of the child's birth.
However, that right is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.'
To be clear, the Supreme Court justices did not rule on the merits, or constitutionality, of ending birthright citizenship. The Trump administration didn't ask the court to rule on the issue itself, and instead asked the high court to rule on whether federal judges have the power to issue injunctions that would block Trump's order nationwide, while litigation continues. The Supreme Court ruled in Trump's favor to narrow the scope of nationwide injunctions imposed by federal judges, effectively sending back the rulings to lower courts.
For the 28 states that have not challenged the birthright executive order in court, automatic citizenship could end for children born in the U.S. whose parents are undocumented immigrants, and some temporary residents and visitors, according to the New York Times. The court also stopped his executive order from taking effect for 30 days.
Friday's ruling is a significant victory for Trump, and a major blow to his opponents who have been trying to limit his executive orders.
Trump calls ruling 'monumental victory'
On Friday, speaking at the White House, Trump called the decision a 'monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.'
That's the opposite of what Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, which argued ' the Court's decision is nothing less than an open invitation for the Government to bypass the Constitution. The rule of law is not a given in this Nation, nor any other. It is a precept of our democracy that will endure only if those brave enough in every branch fight for its survival. Today, the Court abdicates its vital role in that effort. With the stroke of a pen, the President has made a 'solemn mockery' of our Constitution.'
And added, 'The gamesmanship in this request is apparent and the Government makes no attempt to hide it. Yet, shamefully, this Court plays along.'
In a separate dissent, Jackson called the majority decision an ' existential threat to the rule of law.'
In response, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote the majority decision pushed back, and said 'No one disputes that the Executive has a duty to follow the law. But the Judiciary does not have unbridled authority to enforce this obligation—in fact, sometimes the law prohibits the Judiciary from doing so.'
Trump first pledged to end birthright as early as 2015, and again in 2018, before issuing an executive order on the issue in January.
Trump has instituted a crackdown on immigration since taking office that has lead to some immigrants, green card holders, foreigners, and even American citizens being detained by the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
The Latest: California Democrats will vote on a new congressional map to counter Texas
The national redistricting battle enters its next phase with California Democrats scheduled Thursday to pass a new congressional map for voters to consider in November that would create five more winnable seats for their party, a direct counter to the GOP Texas House members imposing a new map on their state's voters at the urging of President Donald Trump. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has engineered the high-risk strategy in response to Trump's brinkmanship in Texas, where passage by the Republican-controlled state Senate and signature by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott are now all that's needed to make the maps official. California by contrast has an independent commission and only a voter-approved ballot measure can override the current map. The Latest: Trump escalates threats against California over transgender policies 'Any California school district that doesn't adhere to our Transgender policies, will not be funded,' President Donald Trump said in a Thursday morning social media posting. The new warning from Trump comes after his administration sued the California Department of Education last month for allowing transgender girls to compete on girls' sports teams, alleging the policy violates federal law. The lawsuit filed by the Justice Department says California's transgender athlete policies violate Title IX, the federal law that bans discrimination in education based on sex. California has sued the Trump administration for unlawfully intimidating health care providers into stopping gender-affirming care for transgender youth. That lawsuit was filed with attorneys general from 15 states and the District of Columbia, plus the governor of Pennsylvania. State Department press officer fired after questioning talking points on Israel and Gaza Officials said Shahed Ghoreishi, a contractor working for the Bureau of Near East Affairs, was terminated over the weekend following two incidents in which his loyalty to Trump administration policies was questioned. He and two current U.S. officials say he drew ire for drafting a response to an Associated Press query related to discussions between Israel and South Sudan about the possible relocation of Palestinians from Gaza to South Sudan. The draft response included a line that said the U.S. does not support the forced relocation of Gazans, something that Trump and his special envoy Steve Witkoff have said repeatedly. That line was rejected by the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, according to Ghoreishi and the officials. He also questioned an embassy statement referring to the West Bank as the biblical 'Judea and Samaria.' The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel changes. Texas governor says new maps will 'better reflect the actual votes of Texans' Republican Gov. Greg Abbott says he'll sign into the law the redrawn U.S. House districts that give his party five more winnable seats. He had put escalating pressure on Democrats to come home during their two-week walkout that had delayed the vote. 'While Democrats shirked their duty, in futility, and ran away to other states, Republicans stayed the course, stayed at work and stayed true to Texas,' he said. Abbott spoke after the Texas Republicans used their majority in the House to approve the new congressional voting maps on Wednesday. Seconds later, House Speaker Dustin Burrows removed the 'call of the House.' The chamber doors were unlocked and House members are now allowed to leave.
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Allies to the rescue — European leaders try to keep Trump on the correct side in Ukraine/Russia war
It's not often that you have eight European leaders, including one whose country is at war, descend on Washington in as close to an unplanned snap visit as you can get. Let's hope that the White House visit convinced the White House resident of the importance of the moment. Monday afternoon, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was joined by the leaders of Germany, France, Italy, the U.K., Finland, the European Commission and NATO in a surprise summit following President Donald Trump's Alaska meeting with Russian despot Vladimir Putin. Trump seems to have understood the Oval Office meeting as him, the genius dealmaker, convening the allies after a successful rendezvous with the Russian adversary, bringing everyone together in advance of brokering the peace deal that will win him the Nobel Peace Prize. Whatever it takes; and that perception was likely reinforced by the heavy praise heaped on him, though of course he doesn't grasp that his NATO counterparts have internalized the fact that flattery is the only language Trump will listen to. That and English, which fortunately they all speak well enough to have been able to tag team off each other without translators in bringing Trump around on not selling out Europe to an imperialist Russia, something European leaders probably did not expect to have to be doing 80 years after the end of WWII. In actuality, this was more like the adults rushing to stop a toddler who had announced his intention to put a fork in the light socket before any further damage could be done. They certainly all watched in horror as Trump accomplished little but once again parroting Putin talking points after rolling out the red carpet for his admired authoritarian on U.S. soil, a meeting at which the Ukrainians were not represented. This after having spent days talking about the possibility of ceding Ukrainian territory as part of some sort of agreement, and chastising Ukraine — invaded unprovoked by a much larger neighbor — of starting the war itself. At least this frenzied intervention by our European friends does seem to have yielded some success, primarily in the form of Trump agreeing to some form of U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine, which are likely to be the only thing that actually incentivizes Putin to back off and stay back when a peace deal is reached. Something akin to NATO's core Article 5 on joint defense comes to mind. The problem is that such guarantees are only really worth anything if they're credible; it is fundamentally a threat, and threats are meaningful when the target has reason to believe there will be follow-through. Unfortunately, we can't say that we expect Trump to stick to this message discipline. Given everything that we've seen so far in this administration, odds are that shortly Trump will be insisting that Ukraine handle its own affairs or that the U.S. will only provide security guarantees in exchange for some kind of pay or materials deal; either that or he'll simply back off from the position altogether. Even if he then comes around again, every time Trump wobbles on dead-serious international commitments, including support for the NATO alliance itself, it saps at their ultimate credibility and therefore makes them less potent. We guarantee this: neither Trump nor any of us want to live in the world in which Putin believes he is not going to face consequences for his aggressive expansionist agenda. Trump made the commitments, now prove us wrong by sticking to them. _____
Newsweek
a minute ago
- Newsweek
The 1600: Dems Want a Fighter. Is Newsom It?
The Insider's Track Good morning, We've got a late entry for The Craziest $#*! I Read This Week. It's a local story here in the Big Apple, but it's a good one and comes courtesy of the great journalists over at The City: A close advisor to Eric Adams, our illustrious mayor, has been suspended from his re-election campaign after she gave a reporter a wad of cash tucked inside a bag of Sour Cream & Onion potato chips. The failed payoff, which she brushed off as a cultural misunderstanding, comes as even more of Adams' associates are expected to be indicted on corruption charges in the coming days. If you enjoy a good trainwreck election, I really recommend following the New York City mayoral race. It's got everything. A cartoonishly corrupt incumbent polling in the single digits. A disgraced former governor attempting and failing the world's most half-hearted political comeback. A charismatic rich-kid socialist with no experience whose first real job will be running a $2T economy. And on the GOP side, a beret-wearing perennial also-ran most famous for staging vigilante subway rescues in the 80's, who now lives in a studio apartment with six cats. Greatest city in the world, baby! On the topic of elections, there have been some notable developments this week while we've spent our time together focused on geopolitics. Today, the Texas Senate will likely pass the state's new mid-cycle congressional map, after the House rammed it through yesterday. This kicks off a new redistricting war that California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vowed to answer with his own redrawn map. The move got the blessing from Barack Obama, who weighed in from his perch in Martha's Vineyard that Newsom was taking a "smart and measured" approach ahead of the midterms. If you haven't been following, Newsom is the toast of the town at the moment—at least among liberals—for the aggressive posture he's adopted, both in policy and style. On social media, the governor has crafted this new persona as a Trump-esque troll, posting in ALL CAPS and in Trump's signature style, generating AI memes at Trump's expense, excoriating MAGA as a bunch of lemmings and essentially playing POTUS' own game against him. And it's working. He has rocketed to the top of the (very early and still meaningless) 2028 polls with this strategy, which tells you that Democratic voters badly want a fighter. I can see why Newsom is an attractive choice to go up against what will likely be JD Vance in '28. He is one of the few Dems who is able to play in the mud with Trump and come out clean. Michelle Obama was famous for that saying, "When they go low, we go high" even though it was precisely the wrong political advice for the Trump era. Newsom understands that it should actually be, "When they go low, we go lower." But he has two big problems. One is that he runs what is arguably the most dysfunctional state in the country, and that comes with a lot of baggage. The other is that he comes across as just a little too slick for his own good. As a buddy of mine put it, "Newsom looks like he'd lay off your dad and then post on LinkedIn about how difficult it was." Maybe I'm wrong. If Vance is the nominee, maybe Newsom is the perfect candidate to run against him. Both of them seem like they're willing to say or do anything to get elected, with no deep or apparent convictions. Remember, Vance called Trump "America's Hitler" not all that long ago, and now he's his VP! That's still crazy to me. Newsom is also a very good fundraiser, and there are reports this week that Elon Musk has already pumped the brakes on his brief attempt at building a third party and is now leaning toward backing Vance instead. That is going to be formidable: an incumbent veep, with Trump's blessing and Musk's unlimited cash. But I think Democrats have a way to win in such a scenario. We'll get into that tomorrow. The Rundown Thirty minutes into conversing with Ohio College Republican Federation President Spencer Mandzak, I was compelled to ask why he was a Republican instead of a Democrat. After nearly three years in Washington, D.C., I found the answer to that question generally materialized within five minutes of meeting a politico. Mandzak was different, however. He introduced himself by sharing an op-ed he'd written on the importance of curating bipartisanship online. He said that economics and foreign policy were his top political issues, and he offered no charged opinions on topics like religion or sexuality. "You're not going to get a lot of probably interesting viewpoints from me, just because I try to stay in my lane," he responded. "But I can tell you why I'm not a Democrat." Read more from Newsweek's Alex J. Rouhandeh. Also happening: Election 2028: Elon Musk is considering backing Vice President JD Vance in the 2028 presidential election, according to reports on the billionaire's political movements. The tech CEO formed a new party and pledged to contest both Republicans and Democrats at the 2026 midterms, but his relationship with Vance, who considers Musk a personal friend, may not be as damaged as it seems. Read more . Elon Musk is considering backing Vice President JD Vance in the 2028 presidential election, according to reports on the billionaire's political movements. The tech CEO formed a new party and pledged to contest both Republicans and Democrats at the 2026 midterms, but his relationship with Vance, who considers Musk a personal friend, may not be as damaged as it seems. . Immigration: A federal appeals court on Wednesday sided with the Trump administration in its bid to end humanitarian protections for tens of thousands of immigrants from Central America and Nepal. The ruling puts on hold a lower court's order that had temporarily preserved Temporary Protected Status for nearly 60,000 migrants. Read more. This is a preview of The 1600—Tap here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
