US Supreme Court appears sceptical of US birthright citizenship challenge

Lead

The US Supreme Court appeared skeptical on Wednesday of President Donald Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship, as the president made a historic appearance at the oral arguments. The case, which could reshape a cornerstone of US immigration law, drew a crowd of protesters outside the courthouse and intense scrutiny from across the political spectrum.

Coverage comparison

Reporting on the hearing varied in emphasis. Al Jazeera focused on the protests outside the Supreme Court, noting that demonstrators gathered as justices heard arguments. The BBC highlighted the potential impact on children born to undocumented immigrants and temporary US visitors, noting that a majority of the court seemed unconvinced by the administration's arguments. Dawn, a Pakistani English-language daily, emphasized Trump's attendance as "historic," a detail corroborated by multiple sources, and noted that he was the first sitting president to attend oral arguments. France 24 reported that the court "seemed poised to reject" the restrictions, a characterization echoed by other outlets.

Key claims

The administration's executive order, signed on Trump's first day back in office, would limit birthright citizenship to children of American citizens or legal permanent residents. The White House argues that the current policy attracts illegal immigration and that the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause does not guarantee citizenship to children of non-citizens. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices that "most nations do not grant automatic birthright citizenship" and that the existing policy "demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship."

Opponents, including the American Civil Liberties Union, argue that the order is unlawful and would upend more than a century of precedent. The ACLU's Cecillia Wang, representing the challengers, defended broad birthright citizenship, but her presentation was interrupted by Trump's departure.

According to data from the Pew Research Centre, the United States is among 33 countries with automatic birthright citizenship policies. The order would affect the legal status of approximately 250,000 babies born each year, a figure reported by Dawn but not independently verified by other sources.

Perspectives

During more than two hours of arguments, justices from both conservative and liberal wings questioned the legal basis for the order. Chief Justice John Roberts, often a key swing vote, expressed doubt about the administration's reasoning, saying, "I'm not quite sure how you can get to that big group from such tiny [exceptions]." Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also raised practical concerns, asking, "Is this happening in the delivery room?"

The court's 6-3 conservative majority was noted in some reports, but skepticism from conservative justices suggested the administration might face an uphill battle. Trump left the courtroom after the administration's lawyer finished, later posting on Truth Social: "We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow 'Birthright' Citizenship!" – a claim contradicted by the fact that about three dozen countries, mostly in the Americas, have similar policies.

The court is expected to rule by the end of June. A decision against Trump would mark a second major setback for his agenda, following the court's recent invalidation of his global tariffs. A win would hand him a significant victory in his pledge to reshape immigration policy.

Outside the courthouse, demonstrators held signs reading "Trump must go now," as the hearing unfolded. The case is one of several legal battles over Trump's immigration directives, and the outcome could have far-reaching implications for the definition of American citizenship.