Birthright citizenship and Scotus. Don't panic.

by HM2Viking

Community

(This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday, Dec. 06, 2025 Saturday, Dec. 06, 2025 at 11:23:57am PST

Definitely. Naturalization rule are an enumerated congressional power.

If you read the 14th amendment it is very clear that citizenship attaches at birth.

Wong Kim Ark is very clear about the historical reasons that Birthright citizenship was the common understanding since precolonial times. Jus sanguinis was never accepted by the British crown. It was always assumed that the sovereign protected everyone within their realm.

The colonies continued to accept this as the basis of U.S. law.

The 14th amendment reinstated commonly accepted law to overturn Dred Scott. Wong King Ark also made it clear that the correct reading of the 14th amendment was to cover everyone.

The originalists will have to tie themselves in knots to overturn or limit a ruling that is originalist to its core.

I think the challenge will fail.

1. The administration argument has failed in every district court. There is no split circuit issue for them to resolve.

2. A change in nationally accepted practice would create literal chaos. Literally millions of people have been born to noncitizen parents.

3. Congress has made immigration laws that are clearly based on Wong Kim Ark. ( They have not delegated to the executive branch outside of specific constitutional law.)

4. Documents that establish birth are held by the states not the federal government.

5. Both Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett are adoptive parents. I find it difficult to believe that they would ever vote for a proposal that would harm clear citizenship rules for children. (What if a child was abandoned at birth? How could anyone “prove” that this child was born to parents who were US citizens and not undocumented immigrants?

What happens if states pass laws specifically stating that children are citizens of the state are citizens at birth?

How could the Supremes reconcile that conflict?