Mastodawn

#law #intimidation #MafiaState #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

#SCOTUS is taking up one of the term’s most consequential cases∶ Trump’s #ExecutiveOrder on #BirthrightCitizenship, declaring that #children born to parents who are in the #US illegally or temporarily are not US citizens.

#Trump is in attendance. He’s the first
sitting president to attend oral arguments at the nation’s highest court.

#law #intimidation #MafiaState #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

The #BirthrightCitizenship order, which #Trump signed on Jan 20, 2025, the first day of his second term, is part of his #Republican admin’s broad #immigration crackdown.

EVERY lower court that has considered the issue has found the order #illegal & prevented it from taking effect. A definitive ruling by #SCOTUS is expected by early summer.

#law #SCOTUS #intimidation #MafiaState #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

Nonilex

Predictably, #ClarenceThomas sounds most open to the #Trump admin’s position.

Thomas recounts that the aim of the 14th amendment was to make citizens of the freed slaves. “How much of the debates around the 14 Amendment had anything to do with immigration?”

#law #SCOTUS #intimidation #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #Trump #MafiaState

Many of the arguments in today’s case go back to the Supreme Court’s 1898 ruling in the case of Wong Kim Ark, which said a US born child of Chinese nationals was a citizen.

In that ruling, Justice Horace Gray wrote that #14thAmendment “affirms the ancient & fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory. That, he wrote, is “including all children here born of resident aliens.”

#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution

#Trump admin says it doesn’t want Wong Kim Ark case overruled

Sauer noted the govt is “not asking you overrule Wong Kim Ark,” which extended #citizenship to #children born in the US to foreign parents.

But he added that it was “totally unambiguous” that the 1898 ruling “relates to domiciled aliens,” & not what he called “sojourners,” or temporary visitors.

My question, who makes the determination of who qualifies as a tourist?

#law #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/01/us/politics/birthright-citizenship-foundlings.html?smid=url-share

Under #Trump approach, #foundlings given up for #adoption could be #stateless.

5 years ago, when #SCOTUS heard arguments over whether it should overrule #RoeVWade, Justice #AmyConeyBarrett asked a series of questions about #SafeHaven laws, which allow parents to anonymously surrender newborn #babies at hospitals or firehouses, without fear of prosecution.

Under Trump’s Approach to Birthright Citizenship, ‘Foundlings’ Given Up for Adoption Could Be Stateless

Abandoned infants would have to produce evidence that at least one of their biological parents was a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

The New York Times

#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

Her point was that the laws eased some of the burdens of what she called “forced motherhood,” even in absence of a right to #abortion.

‼️But under the #Trump EO, abandoned #infants would not be entitled to #citizenship under the #14thAmendment unless they were able to produce evidence that at least one of their biological parents was a #US #citizen or lawful permanent resident.‼️

#SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Trump

A 1952 #law addressed this problem, though it is not clear whether it would survive a ruling in favor of Trump’s plan. The law conferred #citizenship on #children of “unknown parentage” under the age of 5 who were found in the #UnitedStates unless it was proved, before they turned 21, that they had not been born in the #US.

Notably, the law did not exclude children later shown to have been born to people in the US temporarily or unlawfully.

#law #SCOTUS #intimidation #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #MafiaState #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

After more than an hour of arguments from the #Trump admin [Trump left as defense began], Cecillia Wang, a lawyer with the #ACLU, is presenting arguments on behalf of a class of people challenging the #ExecutiveOrder curtailing #BirthrightCitizenship. She is a birthright citizen herself.

#law #SCOTUS #immigration #BirthrightCitizenship

Chief Justice #JohnRoberts is asking tough questions of both sides. He’s referring to the key 1898 precedent in Wong Kim Ark, which mentions 20X that Wong’s parents were “domiciled” or had permanent residence in the #US. Roberts asks the #ACLU atty if that language can just be dismissed as irrelevant.

Earlier, Justice #KetanjiBrownJackson asked of the #Trump admin atty, “Are we bringing women in for depositions? How are we figuring this out?”

#law #intimidation #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #Trump #MafiaState #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

If this case sounds familiar, that’s because because #SCOTUS has already ruled on one aspect of litigation over Trump’s executive order ending the guarantee of #BirthrightCitizenship.

But importantly, that case did not test the constitutionality of the order itself, as the one the justices are hearing Wednesday will. Essentially they passed the buck.

#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship

In the first part of oral arguments, John Sauer, the #Trump admin’s lawyer, faced skeptical questions from key justices, but it wasn’t a rout. In the second part, some of those same justices vigorously probed the position of the #ACLU lawyer, Cecillia Wang. #DoubleStandard

#Kavanaugh asks the ACLU’s lawyer about possible ways of resolving the case & suggests it could be a short opinion if the justices were to uphold Wong Kim Ark & side with the ACLU. 🤞

#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

The #14thAmendment says people “born or naturalized in the United States & subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

The #Trump admin has long focused on the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” saying that excludes parents living illegally in the #US.

But Wang went directly at that argument Wednesday.

#law #SCOTUS #intimidation #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #Trump #MafiaState #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

#ACLU atty Wang said that the legal focus should be on the newborn: “The question that the #14thAmendment asks is whether the #US born #child is subject to US jurisdiction when they’re born.”

#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #MafiaState #AbuseOfPower #WhiteSupremacy #WhiteChristianNationalism #hypocrisy

Sauer, the admi’s lawyer, had a few minutes for rebuttal.

The justices heard arguments for more than two hours. #Trump left just over an hour into the session, after his lawyer wrapped up.

The argument is over. The justices will meet shortly to cast their tentative votes. The decision is likely to land in late June or early July.

Finitum 10h ago

@Nonilex he had to scoot before the adderall wore off. Not sure sleep-farting through oral argument would've been particularly persuasive but you never know with Alito & Thomas.

FurballsNHairballs 8h ago

@Nonilex
Too bad they didnt end the session with a " You , Donald J Yrump, are hereby remanded into the custody of the fexeral government to serve no less than 15 years at USP Florence ADX for espiionage and no less than 20 years for statutory rape and sex trafficking. Bailiff, take him into custody".

Stephen Dioxide

10h ago

@Nonilex I don't see an upside to arguing that non-citizen residents of the US are not subject to its jurisdiction. Would that not amount to immunity from prosecution?

FinchHaven sfba 10h ago

@Steve

"Would that not amount to immunity from prosecution?"

Exactly

And immunity from being arrested and detained by armed #ICE and #CBP thugs, one would think

cc @Nonilex

FinchHaven sfba 10h ago

@Nonilex

"The #Trump admin has long focused on the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” saying that excludes parents living illegally in the #US."

If #Trump wants to claim that "parents living illegally in the #UnitedStates" are --> not <-- "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" how exactly is #ICE and #CBP arresting and detaining those people?

Other than by simple violent, armed thuggery that is?

𝐉𝐨𝐧 𝐁𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐫 10h ago

@Nonilex My Con Law prof said - or rather, through expert Socratic questioning, got one of my classmates to say - that "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was specifically intended to exclude members of Native American tribes that were, at least in theory, independent sovereignties. It's hard to believe that there's enough controversy on this point to even justify a cert grant, but apparently at least four Supremes did believe it, so here we are. I don't think the government is going to prevail here, but I also don't think it's going to be unanimous.

FinchHaven sfba 11h ago

@Nonilex

"...unless they were able to produce evidence that at least one of their biological parents was a #US #citizen or lawful permanent resident."

So then at what point does #AmyConeyBarrett and the other right-wing #SCOTUS "justices" demand that a #BiologicalParent" was verifiably a biological #Man or a #Woman at birth by their criteria? #SlipperySlope

Bean 🇺🇸🇻🇪11h ago

@Nonilex

Am I wrong to feel slightly optimistic about which way the justices are leaning on this?

PetterOfCats 11h ago

@TechBean @Nonilex best argument to put before the court is to state that if the 14th was “only for freed slaves” than no one but the descendants of freed slaves are then technically a citizen at this point in time. Can’t say one without implying the other.

@TechBean

I no longer get my hopes up with this court

So‑Called Vaughn 7h ago

@Nonilex Interesting. Looks like they’ll wrangle about whether ‘resident’ was meant to be construed in plain English (‘they live here’) or as ‘legal resident’. There seems to be no such ‘legal’ qualifier in J. Gray’s quote, because it had the plain meaning.

A quick check suggests that ‘lawful entry’ as a defining aspect of ‘legitimate’ residency simply didn’t exist (at least at a federal level) until the Immigration Act of 1924.