DENVER ‒ The Supreme Court’s refusal to stop President Donald Trump from revoking automatic birthright citizenship for anyone born in the United States has sparked outrage among migrant communities.
The court’s June 27 decision does not affect anyone with birthright citizenship and gives lower courts 30 days to consider the matter further.
Advocates immediately filed a class-action lawsuit to stop Trump’s plan, which would eliminate automatic citizenship for babies born in the United States unless their parents were also citizens or legal, permanent residents.
The measure is not retroactive, so it will only apply to babies born after it goes into effect, if the courts allow it.
Among those suing to stop Trump’s plan is “Liza,” a Russian-born graduate student in Texas who gave birth after the president issued his executive order.
Liza, who has been granted anonymity by federal courts in recognition of her immigration status, expressed concern about going to the Russian embassy to register their child’s birth because her husband has applied for asylum in the United States after fleeing their home country.
Liza’s baby is currently protected from losing US citizenship thanks to a preliminary injunction issued by a lower court, which will now consider the merits of Trump’s proposal. Liza admitted she was “sick with worry” that the courts would rule before her baby was born.
“Fortunately, our baby was born healthy and happy…” We are still concerned that the government will one day take away our baby’s citizenship,” she said at a press conference following the Supreme Court’s June 27 decision.
“I’m sad about what today’s decision means for all the parents whose children are not protected by the current preliminary injunction and who are now even more scared about their children’s future,” she told the audience.
SCOTUS ruling on birthright citizenship changes nothing immediately
In Denver, the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition was rushing to reassure pregnant women that the court’s decision in the Trump v. CASA Inc. case would have no immediate impact.
“It is really scary for people who are having children right now…that someone would want to take away this fundamental right,” spokeswoman Raquel Lane-Arellano stated. “I don’t see a reality where birthright citizenship gets revoked, (but) for people watching the news, that might not be clear.”
The 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship, which means that anyone born in the United States is automatically a citizen. The only current exception is for children of foreign diplomats, which the Supreme Court has previously upheld.
However, the possibility that Trump will end the right guaranteed by the 14th Amendment has alarmed groups who had hoped the Supreme Court would outright reject his initiative.
The Supreme Court’s decision paves the way for lower courts to review the president’s plan over the next month.
“Today is a sad day for all of those who care about the US Constitution and the constitutional rights of children born in the United States on a daily basis,” said Conchita Cruz, co-executive director of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project. “It is a confusing moment for immigrant families as they see the news and are not necessarily sure what it means or how it could it impact them.”
What does ending the birthright citizenship mean?
One of Trump’s first actions after returning to the White House was to issue an executive order declaring that children born to parents on tourist, student, or work visas, or who are illegally present, are not automatically citizens. His order would not affect children born to US citizens or those with legal permanent residency.
Migrant-rights groups had hoped the Supreme Court would reaffirm its previous decision in favour of birthright citizenship, but were disappointed when the court instead directed lower courts to consider the legal merits of the president’s plan.
According to the Migration Policy Institute, ending the policy could affect approximately 255,000 babies born in the United States each year.
Experts warn that Trump’s order could result in “stateless” people born in the United States who have no connection to their parents’ birth countries.
New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin expressed satisfaction that the High Court recognised that nationwide judicial orders can be used to protect plaintiffs from harm and vowed to continue fighting for birthright citizenship on its merits.
“We welcome the opportunity to continue making our case before the district court particularly because the Executive Order will not take immediate effect, to show that the President’s approach to birthright citizenship is a recipe for chaos on the ground and harm to the States,” Platkin informed X. “We are confident that his flagrantly unconstitutional order will remain enjoined by the courts.”
Trump ran for office on a platform of strict immigration control, and he repeatedly stated that he would seek to revoke birthright citizenship. Many countries have abolished birthright citizenship, including the United Kingdom and most of Europe.
Trump has promised to deport 1 million people each year, and eliminating birthright citizenship would make it easier for federal officials to deport entire families. Historically, parents of US citizen babies have frequently been allowed to remain in the country, even if they entered illegally themselves.
Panic and uncertainty among migrants
Nivida, a mother of three who immigrated to the United States in 2019 to avoid persecution by a criminal gang in her native Honduras, told USA TODAY that the court decision has caused panic among her family and friends.
“I’m very sad and anxious at the same time,” said Nivida, who lives in Louisiana with her three young children and is only identified by her first name in court documents.
She claims she is exempt from the order because she is one of the unidentified asylum-seeking plaintiffs in the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project lawsuit, which reached the nation’s highest court.
“I may not be affected personally,” she said through a translator, “but there are many people around me who will be affected.”
One of Nivida’s best friends, she claims, is five months pregnant and is not protected by the ruling’s asylum provisions.
“She’s very worried, because she’s not sure what is going to happen to her baby when they are born and what kind of identity they’re going to have because of the decision that the Supreme Court took today,” Nivida told me.
“It’s very disappointing and very sad.” “This has been in the United States Constitution for 150 years,” she said. “And this type of executive order is something I’ve only seen in other countries where corruption exists.
And I thought this country was different. I expected to see respect for the law and the United States Constitution here.”
