糖心动漫vlog

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

The Supreme Court will soon rule on a birthright citizenship case that could change the shape of the nation. 

The decision, which is expected later this month, comes in response to President Donald Trump’s January 2025 ending the 158-year-old practice that was enshrined in the Constitution by the 14th Amendment. 

Trump wants to ban birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and those whose parents are temporary residents.  

In another critical immigration-related case, the court will decide whether Trump can terminate the Temporary Protected Status that has allowed Haitian and Syrian immigrants to live and work in the United States for years as their home countries were in turmoil.

Many watching these two cases believe the justices will preserve birthright citizenship 鈥� but may strike down TPS for these two groups. Hundreds of thousands of lost that protected status last year. 

Ending birthright citizenship would be an abomination, immigrant advocates say, especially for children. 

鈥淏irthright citizenship is one of America’s most consequential commitments 鈥� the idea that where you are born, not where your parents came from, determines your belonging to this nation,鈥� said Adam Strom, executive director and co-founder of Reimagining Migration. 鈥淔or the millions of immigrant-origin children in our schools, this isn’t an abstraction. It’s the ground they stand on.鈥�

Several justices were skeptical of the government鈥檚 position as presented by Solicitor General D. John Sauer in oral arguments April 1. Sauer argued that the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment was put in place to protect the offspring of formerly enslaved people, whose allegiance to the country was not under question. 

鈥淚t did not grant citizenship to the children of temporary visitors or illegal aliens, who have no such allegiance,鈥� he said, adding, 鈥渦nrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations.鈥� 

Sauer said it demeans the priceless and 鈥減rofound gift鈥� of American citizenship.

But Justice Elena Kagan wasn鈥檛 sure the government鈥檚 overall argument was as strong as Sauer claimed. 

鈥淚 think even your brief concedes that the position you’re taking now is a one with respect to a substantial part of our history,鈥� she told him. 

Cecillia Wang, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the law is clear and irrefutable. 

鈥淭he 14th Amendment鈥檚 fixed, bright-line rule has contributed to the growth and thriving of our nation,鈥� said Wang, the U.S.-born daughter of Taiwanese immigrants. 鈥淚t is workable, and it prevents manipulation. The executive order fails on all those counts. Swaths of American laws would be rendered senseless, thousands of American babies will immediately lose their citizenship, and if you credit the government’s theory, the citizenship of millions of Americans, past, present, and future, could be called into question.鈥�

Ernesto Casta帽eda, director of the Center for Latin American and Latino Studies and the Immigration Lab at American University, is among those who expect the justices to reject the federal government on birthright citizenship, even if 鈥渢hey have been very creative (in the past) when they want to go along with Trump.鈥� 

The court handed the president a number of wins on immigration in 2025, allowing, for example, federal agents to based on scant evidence they were in the country unlawfully. 

The justices might now view the president as less influential and feel more emboldened in going against him, Casta帽eda said: And ending birthright citizenship would rock every sector. 

鈥淚t impacts scientists, it impacts CEOs, it will impact a lot of people that we don’t think about,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hey may be here legally and contribute to the U.S., but they are not citizens yet and again their kids wouldn’t be able to have that citizenship dividend. They would be in a limbo situation. They might prefer to work in another country that makes things easier.鈥�

The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1866, a year after the Civil War ended, undid the high court鈥檚 infamous Dred Scott ruling of 1857. In that case, justices stated that enslaved people were and therefore could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts. 

Tsion Gurmu, a Houston-based immigration attorney and legal director of the Black Alliance for Just Immigration, said the court should overrule what she called a 鈥渄angerous attempt to resurrect a system the 14th Amendment was designed to eradicate.鈥澛�

Her group filed an amicus brief in this case. 

鈥淭he birthright citizenship executive order would deepen (existing) harms by exposing children of Black immigrants to heightened surveillance, detention, and deportation,鈥� she said, adding it would strip their U.S.-born children of access to critical health and nutrition programs, 鈥渋nflicting the wound of a legal regime that once again makes citizenship contingent on ancestry.鈥�

Casta帽eda also sees a return to a pre-14th Amendment America if birthright citizenship were taken away, one where 鈥渟lavery was inheritable. Illegality will go from being a one-generation curse to a multi-generational curse.鈥�

And it would be catastrophic for schools as students鈥� educational rights would be under question, Casta帽eda said. 

Immigrant advocates feel less secure about Temporary Protected Status. 

Viles Dorsainvil, executive director of the in Springfield, Ohio, home to thousands of Haitian immigrants, said his community is bracing for one of three outcomes: The high court could rule in Haitians鈥� favor, allowing them to stay; end the program in a set time period, giving families three to six months to leave; or immediately call for their departure 鈥� either voluntarily or through aggressive immigration enforcement efforts. 

鈥淓verybody would be in limbo and workplaces will be disrupted,鈥� he said of the last scenario. 鈥淭here will be so much disturbance in the community.鈥�

But even if they win their case, Dorsainvil says he鈥檚 worried the government would find other ways to torment Haitians in America. Springfield was the target of and had to close schools during the 2024 election campaign after Trump repeatedly made , outlandish 鈥� and what many saw as racist 鈥� claims against the city鈥檚 Haitian community.

鈥淭he administration will continue to come up with policies that will make immigrants miserable in order for them to self-deport,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hat is the purpose: to force us to leave. We are preparing for that.鈥�

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how The 74鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.