Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship, rejecting Trump’s limits — COLORADO COMMENTS
WASHINGTON | A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a broad conception of birthright citizenship, rejecting President Donald Trump’s executive order declaring that children born to people who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens.
The justices relied on a long-settled understanding of the 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, and more recent federal laws in ruling that anyone born in the country, with very limited exceptions, is a citizen.
“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights—to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land,’” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court, citing congressional debate over the amendment, “We keep that promise today.”
Three conservative justices would have allowed the restrictions to take effect.
COLORADO COMMENTS
Aurora Democratic Congressperson Jason Crow: “The right to birthright citizenship is in our Constitution. It’s who we are as Americans. It’s been that way for generations, despite Donald Trump’s attempts to change that. Today’s ruling underscores that fundamental truth: people born on American soil are Americans, with all the rights and responsibilities we share as fellow citizens.”
Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet: “Birthright citizenship is a cornerstone of our Constitution and rests on the belief that all Americans are equal under the law. Any attempt to revoke or undermine that constitutional guarantee is unlawful, and the Supreme Court agrees. In February, I joined 27 of my Senate colleagues urging the Supreme Court to protect birthright citizenship against Trump’s heinous attacks. Today, the Supreme Court stood with every other court in the nation that has considered this issue and made clear: if you are born in the United States, you are an American citizen. That is a victory for the rule of law, for our Constitution, and for the promise of this country. We must continue to stand up for those values and for an America that strives every day to live up to its founding ideals.”
State Sens Mike Weissman, D-Aurora, and Iman Jodeh, D-Aurora, and Reps Yara Zokaie, Elizabeth Velasco and Lorena García: “Today, we breathe a sigh of relief that the Supreme Court upheld one of the foundational principles of our country: that anyone born on American soil is an American citizen. This decision affirms a core promise of our democracy that anyone born here has the right to pursue the American Dream, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. This principle has defined the United States for over 150 years. At the same time, we cannot ignore decisions announced last week that restrict access to asylum and endanger Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The Trump Administration continues its broad assault on immigration, narrowing legal pathways for people who come to the United States in search of safety and opportunity – many fleeing war, violence, natural disasters, and persecution. Their choice is often one between life and death.” Just a few years ago, it would have been unthinkable to question the legality of birthright citizenship. While today’s decision reaffirms common sense and the fundamental promise of our democracy, it is a sobering reminder of how this administration is willing to undermine our rights, restrict our constitutional freedoms, and divide our communities for political gain.”
Democratic Boulder DA Michael Dougherty: “The 14th Amendment is not ambiguous. It is not optional. And it cannot be erased by political rhetoric, executive action, or ideological wishful thinking. This case was never just about immigration. It was about whether politicians can pick and choose which parts of the Constitution they are willing to follow. The answer is no. The rule of law matters. Constitutional rights matter. And attempts to weaken constitutional protections for political gain should concern every American, regardless of party.”
“The Court today takes the extraordinary step of holding facially unconstitutional the President’s Order excluding from citizenship the children of foreign temporary visitors and illegal aliens,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a 91-page dissent, more than three times as long as Roberts’ opinion. “In doing so, the Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support.”
The Republican president’s restrictions had been blocked by several lower courts and had not taken effect anywhere in the U.S.
During arguments in April, both conservative and liberal justices questioned the order’s legality in a momentous case that was magnified by Trump’s unprecedented attendance in the courtroom.
The case framed another test of Trump’s assertions of executive power that defy long-standing precedent for a court with a conservative majority and a robust view of presidential power that has largely ruled in his favor. In the notable exceptions when the court has not, Trump has responded with starkly personal criticisms of the justices.
The justices ruled on Trump’s appeal of a lower-court ruling from New Hampshire that struck down the citizenship restrictions.
The birthright citizenship order, which Trump signed on the first day of his second term, is part of his administration’s broad immigration crackdown.
Birthright citizenship was the first Trump immigration-related policy to reach the court for a final ruling. The justices previously struck down global tariffs Trump had imposed under an emergency powers law that had never been used that way.
Trump reacted furiously to the late February tariffs decision, saying he was ashamed of the justices who ruled against him and calling them unpatriotic.
He also seemed to recognize the court was likely to rule against him on birthright citizenship, too, using his Truth Social platform to criticize “dumb judges and justices” and wealthy pregnant women from China and elsewhere who come to the U.S. to give birth so their newborns will have American citizenship.
Trump’s order would have upended widely held views that the 14th Amendment confers citizenship on everyone born in the U.S., excluding only the children of foreign diplomats and those born to a foreign occupying force.
The amendment was intended to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship, though the Citizenship Clause is written more broadly. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” it reads.
In a series of decisions, lower courts have struck down Trump’s executive order as illegal. The decisions have invoked the high court’s 1898 ruling in Wong Kim Ark, which held that the U.S.-born child of Chinese nationals was a citizen.
The Trump administration argued that the common view of citizenship is wrong, asserting that children of noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and therefore are not entitled to citizenship.
More than one-quarter of a million babies born in the U.S. each year would have been affected by the executive order, according to research by the Migration Policy Institute and Pennsylvania State University’s Population Research Institute.
While Trump has largely focused on illegal immigration in his rhetoric and actions, the birthright citizenship restrictions also would have applied to people who are legally in the United States, including students and applicants for green cards, or permanent resident status.
Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
Read more Pope begs breakaway traditionalist group to back off bishop consecrations
Read more QUIDNUNC: Trump tariffs leaving little room for July 4 boom in Aurora these days
Read more Greece bets on space technology to contain wildfires
