Supreme Court Decision on Birthright Citizenship: Relief and Concerns

Emily Bazelon: Hi, David. You’re likely to have a more optimistic view of the Supreme Court’s recent rulings, being more upbeat and conservative than me. I feel both relief and foreboding. Birthright citizenship remains intact, and the Federal Reserve keeps its independence.

The decision on birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara is substantially positive. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a convincing opinion on the 14th Amendment’s provision for citizenship. This applies to nearly everyone born in the U.S., excluding children of diplomats and hostile forces. President Trump’s executive order suggesting birthright citizenship is negotiable is now debunked.

David French: Hi, Emily. The ruling’s results are comforting, but I worry the narrow majority might not end this debate. Only five justices fully supported birthright citizenship. This could create a litmus test for judges aligned with Justice Thomas’s dissent.

Emily Bazelon: It’s concerning and could influence future judicial nominations. Birthright citizenship has greatly contributed to American society. It’s an embodiment of the Statue of Liberty’s principles, aiding immigrant integration and fostering social mobility. The majority’s decision upholds this promise, yet only secured five votes from Roberts, Barrett, and the three liberal justices. Kavanaugh’s agreement based solely on a 1940 statute is troubling, as it risks being overturned by Congress. I expected a stronger majority given the robust textual and historical arguments.

Chief Justice Roberts pointed out the dissent’s shaky reasoning, joking about it being supported only by a piece of Lincoln’s funeral oration. What do you think about the justices’ division? Could this intensify MAGA-driven anger about birthright citizenship, as Justice Alito suggests in his dissent?