The Supreme Court heard a case this month centered on President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end so-called birthright citizenship, in one of the most closely watched and potentially impactful cases heard by the court in recent years.
Though the case itself was used largely as a means of challenging lower court powers to issue so-called universal or nationwide injunctions, justices on the high court did inquire about the merits of the order itself, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” which Trump signed on the first day of his second White House term.
The order, which was slated to take force Feb. 20, directed all U.S. agencies to stop issuing citizenship documents to children born to illegal immigrants or children born to mothers living in the country on a temporary visa, if the father is not a permanent resident or U.S. citizen.
Despite the Supreme Court’s focus on universal injunctions in hearing the case, deep and unyielding concerns persist about Trump’s attempt to undo more than 100 years of legal precedent.
JUDGES V TRUMP: HERE ARE THE KEY COURT BATTLES HALTING THE WHITE HOUSE AGENDA
U.S. President Donald Trump shakes hands with U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts (R) as Melania Trump, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump look on after being sworn in during inauguration ceremonies in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on January 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Chip Somodevilla/Pool via Reuters/File Photo (Reuters)
The ACLU included in its lawsuit the story of one couple from Indonesia but living in New Hampshire whom they said would be affected by the order.
“They arrived in 2023, applied for asylum, and their application awaits review,” ACLU attorneys said of the couple. “The mom-to-be is in her third trimester.
“Under this executive order, their baby would be considered an undocumented noncitizen and could be denied basic health care and nutrition, putting the newborn at grave risk at such a vulnerable stage…
