In Stunning Development Supreme Court Agrees to Decide Constitutionality of Trump’s Birthright Citiz

[rangerrebew]

In Stunning Development Supreme Court Agrees to Decide Constitutionality of Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Executive Order
by Cristina Laila Dec. 5, 2025 2:00 pm
 
In a stunning development, the US Supreme Court agreed to decide the Constitutionality of President Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order.

In September President Trump asked the Supreme Court to end birthright citizenship.

Democrat attorneys general sued the Trump Administration to block the birthright citizenship executive order.

Several federal judges have blocked President Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/12/breaking-stunning-development-supreme-court-agrees-decide-constitutionality/

[rangerrebew]

I don't see how they will uphold it since the Constitution is very clear that laws of immigration are the responsibility of congress, not auto-pens, not judges, not the MSM, not governors.

[catfish1957]

Have to agree.  Not enough of constitutional scholar to understand nor make a call on the EO legality of this.

If anything, I hope we can at least enact some legislation that we somehow can bust up the anchor baby scam. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

Have to agree.  Not enough of constitutional scholar to understand nor make a call on the EO legality of this.

If anything, I hope we can at least enact some legislation that we somehow can bust up the anchor baby scam.

The Supremes will likely pass the baton to Congress, where the issue will wither and be buried.

[Wingnut]

The Supremes will likely pass the baton to Congress, where the issue will wither and be buried.

You are spot on.  Dims don't want to end it.  Then their meal ticket of new voters would all but dry up and blow away.

[240B]

Supreme Court to consider sweeping move by President Trump to end birthright citizenship

Daily Mail
By SONYA GUGLIARA
5 December 2025



The US Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on the constitutionality of Donald Trump's controversial efforts to end birthright citizenship.

The conservative-dominated court made the decision on Friday. It has not set a date for oral arguments in the case, but it is likely to be early next year. A decision would then be expected by the summer.

On the president's first day back in the White House for his second term, he signed an executive order called 'Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.'

The order declared that children born on US soil to illegal immigrants and those on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens.

Trump's bid was shot down by several lower courts, which ruled the order unconstitutional because it conflicted with the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment.

This clause states: '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.'

Trump's executive order argues that anyone in the US illegally or on a visa is not 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the country, and therefore left out of this category.

The Trump administration has also argued that the 14th Amendment, passed in the wake of the Civil War, addresses the rights of formerly enslaved people and not the children of undocumented migrants or temporary US visitors.

(more)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15358279/Supreme-Court-Donald-Trump-birthright-citizenship.html

[Kamaji]

Why is this development "stunning?"

[catfish1957]

Why is this development "stunning?"

Hyperbole is the fishing lure of mouse clicks. 

Gutfeld touched on it last night describing  Rachel Madcow and her over-dramatization skills. 

[Fishrrman]

As I've stated in this forum for years now, the "birthright citizenship" issue can never be decided until the [modern] Supreme Court opines on the case. Old decisions won't do.

Once they issue their ruling -- yea or nay -- then the next steps can be taken.

A question:
If the Court tosses this issue into the Congress, would you support ending the filibuster to get it passed in the Senate?

(my reply: of course I would...)

[Smokin Joe]

While I have no doubt that Trump's interpretation of the clause of the 14th is correct, the question is whether the SCOTUS has the collective gonads to say so.

[DCPatriot]

While I have no doubt that Trump's interpretation of the clause of the 14th is correct, the question is whether the SCOTUS has the collective gonads to say so.

Agreed.  They have a tendency to Rule, being too concerned with current social "norms"

[Smokin Joe]

Agreed.  They have a tendency to Rule, being too concerned with current social "norms"

Call it what you will, but today's society isn't 'normal'.

[libertybele]

While I have no doubt that Trump's interpretation of the clause of the 14th is correct, the question is whether the SCOTUS has the collective gonads to say so.

"Collective gonads"?  With Roberts leading the way, I say no.

[Kamaji]

This’ll be fun.

[mystery-ak]

This’ll be fun.

We probably won't hear the *verdict* until next summer...

[Kamaji]

While I have no doubt that Trump's interpretation of the clause of the 14th is correct, the question is whether the SCOTUS has the collective gonads to say so.

I have no doubt Trumps interpretation is wrong, and hope the justices have the gonads to say so. 

[Smokin Joe]

I have no doubt Trumps interpretation is wrong, and hope the justices have the gonads to say so.

You would say the 14th grants the child of illegal aliens citizenship just because they made it over the border before they popped the chute?
  I can't see that. They were in defiance of our laws, just coming here.

[Kamaji]

You would say the 14th grants the child of illegal aliens citizenship just because they made it over the border before they popped the chute?
  I can't see that. They were in defiance of our laws, just coming here.

The 14th doesn’t say you can’t be in defiance of the law, it says everyone who is borne here is a citizen except for those who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. 

So, unless you’re arguing that we cannot arrest an illegal alien for driving without a license and killing a little girl, then you are committed to the position that illegal aliens are subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. once they get here, and that makes their children US citizens if the children are borne here. 

[libertybele]

You would say the 14th grants the child of illegal aliens citizenship just because they made it over the border before they popped the chute?
  I can't see that. They were in defiance of our laws, just coming here.