Public sentiment on Trump's executive order regarding birthright citizenship is polarized and heavily negative. Many express anger at the judicial decision blocking it, viewing it as judicial overreach, while supporting Trump's call for stricter immigration policies. Conversely, there are strong criticisms related to perceived hypocrisy and threats to democracy, with voices of dissent advocating for justice and a more inclusive approach to citizenship rights. The overarching feelings amongst commenters include fear, betrayal, and frustration over implications for civil rights.

Donald Trump

The Supreme Court


As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. 

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

 For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
 
 We are actively looking for new moderators.  If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
 

***


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

totally missed the point of the 14th amendment. Birthright citizenship ain't a bug, it's a feature.

MidnightSnackQueen

I'm not vibing with this birthright citizenship controversy at all. Feels like just another way to marginalize people.

BootyAndBandwidth

Prerequisite for holding *any* elected office needs to be a 100% mark on a 10th grade civics test, Jesus Christ.

4ivE

Why is it taking so long to shut down this nonsense?

jrsinhbca

Its amazing that this was the man that the Republic had three branches of the government turn traitor for.

CT_Phipps-Author

Then make sure you enforce it being unconstitutional.

Nintendo_Pro_03

Duh, obviously. The constitutional language is very specific.

ArchieThomas72

It is odd seeing the total panic of MAGA right now. Any social media and even MSM shows that everybody sees that anything coming out of this administration is just a distraction. Everybody knows who's in the files.

biggestweiner

Unfortunately, this will not be the last of these kind of situations. For the last 30 years, it has been publicized that there was a demographic shift on the horizon. 

There has never, to my knowledge, been a peaceful transition in a society where the ethnic/racial majority (by a fair margin) becomes a minority (although still the largest ethnic/racial group) in their country. There is likely to be outright racial fear mongering and the advent of openly race based political organizations. Policies to sustain the economic and political power will be pushed hard and often.

phiwong

Doesn’t matter, the John Roberts Supreme Court won’t take it up on the merits, only on paltry technicalities that allow Trump to implement nakedly unconstitutional initiatives in a patchwork fashion that guarantees they will never be fully litigated.

firstofallimadelight

Common sense. 

Only Justice Roberts and the gang members would say otherwise.

reddittorbrigade

Absolutely stupid this even had to go to court. Never ahould have been written

muchnycrunchny

HermitageHermit

So can a blatantly unconstitutional order be enforced? Since lower courts can't stop the executive from doing illegal things, and the president is immune?

It's insane how the Supreme Court really destroyed checks and balances just to please Trump. How do you even undo this damage since Rulings never go away?

LetsgoRoger

As is almost anything else this halfwit child rapist does.

I_HateToSayAtodaso

This is so wild to me.


The President says the 14th Amendment is outdated and shouldn't apply to today's United States, and his cult sprays their shorts with excitement.


What if a Democrat President felt that same way about the 2nd Amendment? How would MAGA feel about that?

Charming-Report1669

So now they just need to appeal this up the Supreme court and they'll rule for Trump. 

It's only constitutional if you consider the amendments part of the constitution. But if you skip some then it's not original text. 

I can't wait to hear Elena Kagan absolutely shit during oral arguments on this one.

thesweeterpeter

Wings81

Supreme Court should not even need to hear this case.   They should issue an order striking it down. If they hear the case, that signals they are going to overturn.

TheCzar11

Trump hates the US Constitution, Freedom and is on the Epstein list.

LegitimateRound5014

If illegal aliens aren't "subject to the jurisdiction" of the USA then the US has no legal authority to impose its laws on them, arrest them, charge them with crimes, or deport them. They would essentially have to be treated as foreign diplomats with immunity.

NolanSyKinsley

There's absolutely no textual or historical basis for what Trump wants.

Open_Mortgage_4645

Good, well that settles it! Now just 18 more months of appeals and litigation and hearings and petitions and more hearings until 6 unelected wizards in black robes throw out a whole constitutional amendment because they are completely and utterly unaccountable

RosetteNewcomb

Supreme court would like a word as soon as they get off their knees in front of trump

Faucet860

Ah yes. But what will the Supreme Court say? 🤔

CptJacksp

Billionaires control the media and what you see in TV, movies and what you hear in music. They want to control the way you think. Welcome to the nightmare.

immeyournotaswell

GOP (Guardians Of Pedophiles).

This is not politics as usual. Stand up for what is right. 

r/TrumpThePedophile

SanchezGeorge1

SubtleInTheory

CrimsonHeretic

What? No. 

Shocked! 

And outraged. 

/s

Do you know why /s?

Bc I can fn read the gd piece of fn paper and I can see the mf words and I understand what it fn says. These fn people and their imbecilic inability to read the gd constitution. 

This is not a shocking ruling. Birthright citizenship is our fn BIRTHRIGHT!

External-Goal-3948

Section 1 of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution begins

“**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.”

Something tells me that if they wanted the amendment to apply only to the children of slaves, like Trump has claimed, they would have said “children of slaves” and not “all persons”.

Ok-Hold-8232

supercali45

Wow, who could’ve guessed the 14th Amendment still applies?

Pirateleg82

Does this mean it'll go to the Supreme Court once they appeal?

BlackberryMean6656

We all knew it was coming but it's still nice to see

Dapperrevolutionary

We lost over a million people to Covid . We lose hundred in mass shootings. Thousand in war. We have a large part of population are boomers…  We need people to rebuild our nations workforce.  Immigration helps to keep our country vibrant.

Icy-Big-6457

Can't wait for the Supreme Court to reverse the decision for zero actual reason.

Nvenom8

Motor_Educator_2706

This won't stop him. Only a matter of time before they come after citizenship through marriage.

Thedarkestcharizard

Yeah. No fucking shit.

It's literally in the Constitution.

InsomniaticWanderer

End it now! It’s been abused for decades!!!!

IndependenceFuture12

Tmoldovan

Remember when Trump said that the citizenship clause only applies to "slave babies."

&gt; “It had to do with Civil War results, and the babies of slaves who our politicians felt, correctly, needed protection,” he continued. “Please explain this to the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Donald Trump, the world class historian everybody!

And no, The Supreme Court didn't need explaining in this case, conservatives could have either upheld the constitution, or in their most recent ruling, decide to grant the Trump executive the unbridled authority to wipe its ass with our constitution and unilaterally enact aggressive immigration policies without having to face checks from the judiciary. 

So much for "constitutional originalism" when these conservative supreme Court justices can interpret the law however they see fit, weighing their judicial duty and traditionalism against the prospect of fundamentally changing this country's legal and moral landscape to fit more in line with *their* values and *their* vision for this country and its foreseeable future.

That aside, the 14th amendment firmly establishes birthright citizenship. Yes, it was created in response to the Dred Scott decision, which prohibited African Americans from becoming citizens of the United States, a decision considered by some constitutional scholars to be the worst Supreme Court ruling in US history.

However, it was also invoked in the landmark case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

Wong was born in San Francisco to Chinese parents and first generation immigrants who had established permanent residency in the US and even owned a business.

When Wong returned to the US after a trip to China, he was denied re-entry and then detained under the infamous Chinese Exclusion Act.

Wong was detained on steamships in the San Francisco Bay for several months despite having all the proper documentation and identification forms on him. This included a photograph of Wong and a departure statement that was signed by three witnesses attesting to his identity.

His detention lasted until the courts eventually ruled in his favor. The Supreme Court ruled that the citizenship clause of the fourteenth amendment grants citizenship to all persons ***born in the United States***, and regardless of their parents nationality.

This decision set a fundamental precedent for interpreting the fourteenth's citizenship clause, an over century's long precedent that Trump and his coalition of bigots, nativists and xenophobes are seeking to overturn.

This case should be open and shut. Instead, the highest court did not decide whether Trump's order to end birthright citizenship is legal or constitutional, and chose to essentially eliminate barriers that would otherwise act as checks against his unconstitutional whims. 

I'm sure it doesn't need to be explained that such a decision sets a major precedent moving forward, regardless of this most recent ruling.

Letting the Trump executive impose its will on the country without legal pushback from judges is a hazardous road to go down. Trump has already signed over 160 executive orders, many of which have been challenged by the courts due to the nature of their unconstitutionality. 

Trump and his allies have been defying court orders, threatening judges, ignoring checks and balances, overstepping congressional authority, and taking actions that openly violate the constitution. Not only has Trump faced little accountability in these situations, but his administration's undemocratic agenda is being enabled every step of the way by MAGA loyalists and extremists. 

The fact that this case has even gotten this far is ominous in itself. But the truth is, Trump will spin any ruling in his favor.

If the courts rule, once and for all, that ending birthright citizenship is unconstitutional for instance, he will use the opportunity to push the narrative that he's the victim of a corrupt, "two tiered" justice system. 

But a ruling like the one from SCOTUS that limits the ability of federal judges to challenge Trump's blatantly unconstitutional orders, let's Trump claim a "mandate" to start pursuing more authoritarian immigration policies, all while touting that he was right all along about "activist judges" unfairly obstructing his agenda.

Republicans have put civil rights on the chopping block. And Trump will claim "victory" no matter what; empowering him and the GOP  to start chipping away at every clause or legal precedent that protects the rights, freedoms and civil liberties of non-citizens and citizens alike; rights that they've held in disregard for years. 

And in response to a recent series of rulings that basically legitimize Trump's excessive overreach, Republicans will no doubt set their sights predominantly on the civil rights of marginalized and vulnerable groups.

In fact, The Fourteenth Amendment is in particular danger here because nearly every clause belonging to the amendment protects civil rights and privileges that Republicans have been threatening to invalidate over the years.

There's the citizenship clause of course, the due process clause, the equal protection clause, and the privileges and immunities clause. There's also the clause prohibiting insurrectionists from holding office. Hmm...

Some constitutional scholars argue that The Fourteenth Amendment is considered to be one of the most consequential amendments in US history. Which is precisely why it has earned itself the title of "the cornerstone of civil rights in the United States."

As many of you may know, decisions made in cases like Brown v. Board of education and Roe v. Wade invoked the 14th.

One or more of its clauses have been cited countless times throughout this country's history, and they have also been the basis for many landmark SCOTUS decisions. 

At the rate that they are consolidating power, Republicans will have no choice but to strike while the iron is hot. They haven't been in a better position in decades to retool the rule of law in their favor.

With that said, keep in mind that despite Republicans insisting that Project 2025 was just a liberal conspiracy theory, it was marketed as a blueprint for the next Trump administration. Its success was predicated on establishing a unitary executive led by a president beholden to no one—a king in fact—and a king who can issue unilateral decrees without any dispute.

Choice-of-SteinsGate

Round and round and round the court system

DraftedGolden

Another unconstitutional act by the pedo in chief

Salty_Wedding3845

Make no mistake this will not stop him and they WILL be coming after citizenship through marriage next.

The clowns on the Supreme Court will fix that... This country is ruined, not sure what will be left after this administration. 

Cautious_Condition82

All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. **FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.**

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/law) if you have any questions or concerns.*

yeah it's super weird that the Constitution apparently is going to be decided district by district. 

I mean what's even the point of a union or America in general if federal constitutional rights are implemented in one state differently than their implemented in another or one county versus another.

Bawbawian

I really wish I hadn’t wasted all that time and money on law school just for the fundamental underpinnings of the whole thing to be erased one by one a couple decades later.

Santos_L_Halper_II

With this reasoning from SCOTUS, can’t the entire constitution or any law be voided by executive order? Only localities lucky enough to be granted temporary relief via an injunction would keep the rule of law. 

Trump could say that all non-Christian religions are now illegal. With no legal restrictions from lower courts saying “no that’s ridiculous and against the law,” seems to me like republicans can truly do anything they want.

cicada_noises

Excerpt:

“No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates,” Sotomayor’s dissent read. “Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from lawabiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship.”

Sotomayor used an analogy to illustrate the absurdity of granting the government’s request to strike down nationwide freezes on plainly unlawful orders: “Suppose an executive order barred women from receiving unemployment benefits or black citizens from voting. Is the Government irreparably harmed, and entitled to emergency relief, by a district court order universally enjoining such policies? The majority, apparently, would say yes.”

D-R-AZ

It seems like what they are saying is that the Constitution is really a bunch of nice guidelines to the president. It would be nice if the president followed these suggestions, but they can do whatever they want to anyone at anytime for any or no reason and with no legal recourse. It's hard to imagine that the people who wrote the Constitution had this in mind. The U.S. presidency is moving closer and closer to dictator.

TechieTravis

Can we talk about how far back the scope of revoking birthright citizenship extends?  Is there an infinite regress?  It says:

*"the executive order, which denies automatic citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to undocumented immigrants and those with temporary status"*

Does this only go back one generation?  What if my great grandparents weren't citizens at the time of my grandparents' birth?  Does that mean my grandparents' citizenship is revoked which means my parents' citizenship is revoked, which means my citizenship (and that of my children) is revoked?

FuguSandwich

STOP CALLING IT BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP RULING!!!


This is a ruling removing the ability for nationwide injunctions.


In other words each district must decide if an EO is enforcable or not. This will lead to red districts going along with anything Trump says.


Example hypothetical EOs:


Any protest is an unlawful assembly and each person is guilty of a felony for participating.


You can only vote if a property owner and breadwinner.


You must turn in your guns if you didn't vote for Trump.

doublethink_1984

These are intolerable acts. Folks, we are at an inflection point. Our constitution can be partially dissolved based on the whims of an out of control executive

Wallaces_Ghost

Does this mean that Trump could unilaterally strip anyone of their citizenship at will for any reason and with no recourse?

It's a wide open door for creating stateless people, that's insanity.

snakerjake

This decision is right up there with *Citizens United* in terms of the damage that it will do to democracy.

supes1

The *second* a Democratic president is sworn in next time (if there even will be a next time), this SCOTUS will undo all of these changes and all of a sudden clutch their pearls that presidents aren’t kings and have to be checked by courts again.

rahvan

“No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates,” Sotomayor’s dissent read. “Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from lawabiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship.”

Sotomayor used an analogy to illustrate the absurdity of granting the government’s request to strike down nationwide freezes on plainly unlawful orders: “Suppose an executive order barred women from receiving unemployment benefits or black citizens from voting. Is the Government irreparably harmed, and entitled to emergency relief, by a district court order universally enjoining such policies? The majority, apparently, would say yes.”

Obi1NotWan

How to end the Union with this one simple trick.

Xyrus2000

I think it's important to recognize that all of these MAGA supporters that talk about protecting the constitution do not want to protect the constitution, they want their own constitution. Which entails rewriting the current one and picking and choosing which parts they consider "legal".

Birthright citizenship is a core element of the constitution, and rather than amending the constitution the way it is designed to be amended, they want to circumvent the process to rewrite it the way they want. These people are not "americans" or "patriots" which they so often throw those words around to represent themselves, they are traitors. Home grown domestic terrorists that are using every avenue they can to tear down the institutions of America in the hopes that it will eventually crumble and they can reconstruct it the way they see fit. A white Christian's only, closed borders nation that dictates world policy from a seat of immense military power.

Successful-Train-259

I'm NAL, so pretty ignorant of how these worked to begin with. 

So the lower circuits of each state are no longer allowed to put a temporary stay on something pushed out by the executive through EO, and cause it to be halted on an national scale, right? 

But each state, through the courts, can pause enforcement of an EO they disagree with for their state only, correct? To be followed up with litigation concerning whether or not the state will accept to follow the EO?

If I've got all that right, another commenter raised an important point.

What's the point of a coherent body, this collection of states, if they're each individually allowed to pick and choose which federal laws they enforce? That would result in a fundamental division between the states, driving across state borders like from New Mexico to Texas could become similar to entering a different country entirely, based on the difference in laws enforced in each depending on what each states legislative bodies find socially acceptable.

desiderata1995

With this ruling, anyone, including myself - a white, straight,n upper middle class cis-gendered male who is a direct descendant of William Brewster, the original Governor of the Plymouth colony, can be deported to a foreign gulag before my case can be heard. Right?

Utterlybored

It would be nice if just once any of the so-called liberal media decided to report on three Supreme Court justices warning that we are giving up the rule of law and enabling a tyrant.

MoralityFleece

Remember when dems had a chance to pack the Supreme Court but then didn't because of reasons?

Sweaty-Feedback-1482

This is way beyond insane. This Supreme Court is nothing but a political puppet show and a mockery of what America was just a year ago. This isn’t American and we are now ruled by a minority.

cats_catz_kats_katz

project 2025 gains another major brick in their wall

roraima_is_very_tall

That means..  Trump isn't a citizen. Barron isn't a citizen. They were born in the us.which also means.. Trump cannot be president. Only native Americans can be.

SoftRecommendation86

Canadian watching in horror. 

Trump will use the new executive powers granted by the Supreme Court to suspend elections by executive order on national security grounds. 

SCOTUS will affirm 6-3.

MommersHeart

if you were wondering when you should leave, now is when you should leave.

Everyone who stays will get to participate in the big bad thing that is now officially scheduled.

Attheveryend

&gt;Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor

Jfc no wonder we're so fucked.  People can't stop describing Sotomayor as "liberal."

amitym

I guess now you have to sue to have the constitution apply to you. Great work Republicans.

Also Sottomayor is righter than she knows. There already reports of citizens being disappeared, someone is changing the data inside the government and removing SSN and DL information like they did to the voter rolls.

It is the time we stand up yo this.

If they come for immigrants in the night, they will come for you in the morning.

Remember that.

Ok-Replacement9595

Right... Two weeks later... Order passes into law.

ProfessionalTax5025

nakakagigil

Tune in tonight at 11 for some SCROTUS bullshit.

XennialBoomBoom

Many of his orders are unconstitutional... too bad the Supreme Corrupt Court doesn't care.

Miserable_Pie_8337

A federal appeals court has ruled that President Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship is unconstitutional, blocking its enforcement. This matter may soon be reviewed by the Supreme Court, reigniting the contentious debate surrounding citizenship.

Trump Birthright Citizenship Controversy

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want