US Supreme Court to hear arguments next month on Trump’s birthright citizenship plan

WASHINGTON, DC: The US Supreme Court will hear arguments next month over President Donald Trump’s plan to implement his executive order, which seeks to end the US citizenship right for some children born on American soil, Politico reported.

For now, the court is not formally analysing the constitutionality of Trump’s attempt to end the right to birthright citizenship. Instead, the court will assess a more technical issue, but one that might have significant effects: the authority of lower court judges to issue broad injunctions that block a president’s policies from being enforced across the nation.

Three federal judges separately issued nationwide injunctions against Trump’s birthright citizenship order and said that the order breaches the 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to give citizenship to virtually anyone born on American soil.

Earlier in March, the Trump administration filed emergency appeals, requesting the judges to narrow or lift those injunctions. The administration contended that district judges have no power to issue rulings that block policies across the nation, Politico reported.

In an order issued on Thursday, the Supreme Court agreed to hold a special oral argument on May 15 regarding the question of district judges’ power to issue such rulings. It is rare for the court to schedule arguments on emergency appeals, and the decision indicates that judges are taking the position of the Trump administration seriously.

If the court agrees with the Trump administration’s argument that the judges overstepped their power, it would enable the government to start implementing its citizenship policy in some parts of the country.

Trump announced the policy to end the right to birthright citizenship in an executive order issued on the first day of his second term. The order seeks to deny US citizenship to children born on American soil to parents who are undocumented immigrants or who are in the country on short-term visas.

Many legal experts have said that the policy directly conflicts with the top court’s precedent and the language of the 14th Amendment, which mentions that “all persons born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

Injunctions issued across the nation have stymied a broad spectrum of Trump administration policies since he assumed office for the second term on January 20.

Trump’s Justice Department has contended that federal district judges should have the power to block policies only in the geographic district where the judge is located or regarding the people or groups that sued.

In the emergency appeal filed last month, the Trump administration wrote, “Years of experience have shown that the Executive Branch cannot properly perform its functions if any judge anywhere can enjoin every presidential action everywhere,” Politico reported.

However, nationwide injunctions supporters have called them the only reasonable way to address the unlawful actions of the government. (ANI)