Post

The Supreme Court hears arguments on birthright citizenship this Tuesday. You might have forgotten about this with the flood of news but the legal history here is wild, the stakes are enormous, and the outcome is genuinely uncertain. Let's talk about where we are. 🧵

Trump's Jan. 2025 executive order said babies born here to undocumented or temporary visa holders aren't automatically citizens (contra [waves hands] everything). Every single court that's reviewed it has called it unconstitutional - and now the Supreme Court gets to weigh in.

The 14th Amendment has said since 1868: born in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction = citizen. It was written specifically to overrule Dred Scott. The Trump admin's argument is that this language has been misread for 150+ years and *they* have found the truth.

I def learned some new info here: In 1957, the Court ruled that a baby born here to two undocumented parents was an American citizen. Justice Harlan (a conservative Eisenhower appointee) wrote it almost as an aside. "Of course," he said. The principle continued to be settled.

The admin's argument hinges on three words: "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." They say that means full political allegiance, which undoc people allegedly can't have. (That's BS.) Admin's own 70-page brief never once mentions the 1957 case that settled this.

Also worth knowing: this isn't the first time a Pres. has tried to redefine the citizenship clause. After 1898, McKinley redefined it to exclude people born in Puerto Rico + Guam. The Court deferred & Congress granted citizenship but ambiguity still hasn't been fully resolved.

If the Court sides with Trump, scholars warn it could cast doubt on citizenship going back generations, not just on future births. This case could absolutely remake our Nation's constitutional foundations and signal that truly anything legally goes from now on.

Let's be clear about what's going on here: the push to end birthright citizenship is the actualization of the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, the false idea that nonwhite immigration is an existential threat to American identity. Let's see what side of history the SC is on.

Huge thanks to SCOTUSblog and authors Amy Howe, Neil Weare, and Akhil and Vikram Amar for three pieces that genuinely deepened how I understand this case. Read all three before Tuesday if you can. Other recommended readings to help understand birthright citizenship? Post below