US Supreme Court debates citizenship, with rare Trump visit

President Donald Trump made history by becoming the first sitting leader to attend a Supreme Court oral argument, as he advocated for ending automatic citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants. On Wednesday, Trump observed his administration’s legal team, led by Solicitor General John Sauer, argue against the constitutional basis of birthright citizenship. The discussion centered on whether the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction, should be reinterpreted to align with Trump’s immigration policies.

Trump’s executive order, issued on his first day in office, aimed to revoke citizenship from infants of undocumented parents. This policy would link a child’s legal status to their parents’ immigration compliance. However, the move has faced legal challenges, with every federal court reviewing it ruling against the administration. The Supreme Court is now the final arbiter, expected to deliver a conclusive decision by June.

Outside the courtroom, advocates for birthright citizenship gathered to voice opposition. Inside, Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick sat in the front row, listening to over an hour and a half of legal deliberation. Sauer defended the order, stating,

“Unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations”

and asserting that it “demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.” He also claimed it “operates as a powerful pull factor for illegal immigration and rewards illegal aliens who not only violate the immigration laws but also jump in front of those who follow the rules.”

The justices pressed Sauer on the order’s legal foundation and practical implications. Liberal Justice Ketanji Jackson questioned how the policy would require immediate documentation, asking,

“Are you suggesting that when a baby is born people have to have documents? Present documents? Is this happening in the delivery room?”

Meanwhile, conservative Chief Justice John Roberts called the argument based on the 14th Amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause “quirky.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh echoed this, suggesting federal law supports broader birthright citizenship.

Justice Clarence Thomas, a key ally of Trump, highlighted the amendment’s historical intent, noting it was designed to secure citizenship for Black individuals, including newly emancipated slaves. He posed a pointed question:

“How much of the debates around the 14th Amendment had anything to do with immigration?”

Cecillia Wang of the ACLU countered by emphasizing English common law traditions, which underpin the current jus soli principle. She recalled,

“this court held that the 14th Amendment embodies the English common law rule: Virtually everyone born on US soil is subject to its jurisdiction and is a citizen.”

To view this video, enable JavaScript and upgrade to a web browser supporting HTML5 video.