A U.S. appeals court has shut down the Trump administration’s efforts to eliminate birthright citizenship for certain children of immigrants.
This ruling sets the stage for a potential Supreme Court battle, where the fate of this long-standing constitutional right could be decided.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused an emergency request from the Justice Department to reinstate Trump’s executive order.
A panel of judges, appointed by presidents from both parties, found the order likely unconstitutional. Their decision upholds a lower court ruling that had blocked the order from taking effect.
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, guarantees that anyone born on U.S. soil automatically becomes a citizen, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
Trump’s executive order aimed to limit this right, specifically targeting children of undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders.
The Legal Battle Over Citizenship Rights
Trump’s legal team insisted the executive order was necessary to address border security and immigration loopholes.
They argued that birthright citizenship encouraged illegal immigration and placed a strain on government resources.
Attorneys general from four Democratic-led states challenged the order, stating that citizenship rights are enshrined in the Constitution and cannot be altered by a president.
They argued that changing such a fundamental right requires a constitutional amendment, not an executive order.
The 9th Circuit ruled that the administration failed to prove an emergency justifying immediate enforcement.
Even Judge Danielle Forrest, a Trump appointee, acknowledged that there was no urgent need to bypass standard legal procedures.
The legal fight isn’t over. The case will proceed in the appeals court, with arguments scheduled for June. If Trump’s team continues to push, the Supreme Court may have to settle the matter once and for all.
Trump’s Controversial Remarks on Ukraine and Zelensky Spark Global Reactions
In another political firestorm, former President Donald Trump stirred controversy with his comments on the Russia-Ukraine war.
He claimed that Russia holds the upper hand in negotiations and went further by criticizing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, labeling him a “dictator” for postponing elections.
- Accusation of Weak Democracy: Trump argued that by delaying elections, Ukraine was undermining its democratic values.
- Zelensky’s Defense: Ukraine remains under martial law due to the ongoing war, making elections impossible under current conditions.
- A Shift in U.S. Policy?: Under President Biden, Zelensky has been championed as a symbol of resistance. Trump’s criticism signals a potential shift in U.S. foreign policy if he regains power.
Allies of Ukraine fear that Trump’s stance could embolden Russia and weaken international support for Ukraine’s war efforts.
Trump has signed a sweeping executive order declaring that only the President and Attorney General can interpret the law for the executive branch.
This move effectively grants the President more authority over independent federal agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
- Strengthening the Unitary Executive Theory: Trump’s directive aligns with a legal theory that argues the President should have complete control over the executive branch.
- Power Grab Concerns: Critics warn that this order undermines the independence of key regulatory agencies, allowing the President to reshape them at will.
- Political and Legal Pushback: Lawmakers and legal scholars argue that this move threatens the system of checks and balances, potentially leading to mass firings and executive overreach.
Trump’s recent actions reveal his broader strategy: consolidating presidential power, challenging entrenched legal norms, and reshaping U.S. domestic and foreign policies.
Whether these efforts will survive legal challenges or redefine American governance remains to be seen.