Supreme Court will hear Trump’s proposed limits on birthright citizenship
- Share via
- It was unclear whether the justices would weigh in on the constitutionality of Trump’s proposal or instead decide only whether it can be blocked nationwide by a federal judge acting on behalf of a few plaintiffs.
- Under Trump’s proposal, babies born in this country would not be deemed U.S. citizens if neither the mother nor the father was a citizen or a lawful permanent resident at the time of the birth.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court announced Thursday that it will hear arguments in May on President Trump’s proposed limits on birthright citizenship.
But it was unclear whether the justices would weigh in on the constitutionality of Trump’s proposal or instead decide only whether it can be blocked nationwide by a federal judge acting on behalf of a few plaintiffs.
On his first day back in office, Trump proposed to revise the 14th Amendment’s promise that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”
Under Trump’s proposal, babies born in this country would not be deemed U.S. citizens if neither the parent was a citizen or a lawful permanent resident at the time of the birth.
The proposal was challenged as unconstitutional based on the words and history of the 14th Amendment, and three judges have struck it down nationwide. Those judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state ruled based on lawsuits filed by individuals, groups and 22 states.
Trump administration lawyers argue that district judges should not be allowed to issue rulings that apply nationwide.
Trump’s lawyers said those rulings went too far. They appealed to the Supreme Court on procedural grounds and made what they described as “a modest request.” They said the justices should rein in federal district judges and limit their power to make nationwide rulings.
If the justices were to agree, however, it could clear the way to enforce Trump’s new citizenship rules in many parts of the nation, even while the constitutionality of his plan remained in doubt.
Several justices have voiced skepticism over district judges handing down rulings that set a national rule. But others have questioned the notion of a constitutional revision that goes into effect in some states and not others.
Thursday’s brief order suggests the justices are closely split on how to proceed. They said they will hear arguments on May 15 and would probably issue a decision by late June.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox twice per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
