The court made the announcement yesterday. Interested readers may want to consult my “guide to the birthright citizenship debate.” Here’s an excerpt:
Prof. Yoo makes what many will regard as a persuasive argument for its implementation. Yoo reminds us that when Kamala Harris was born in California in 1964, both her parents were in the U.S. on temporary visas. If the order had been in effect at the time, he notes, Harris wouldn’t have obtained birthright citizenship, she wouldn’t be a natural-born citizen, and she wouldn’t have been eligible to run for president. Though Yoo makes this observation to show that the order is absurd on its face, I suspect many people, including President Trump himself, would regard that as reason enough to support his order.
There’s much more information the piece itself, including links to some of the best arguments on each side. For what it’s worth, here’s what I concluded:
Despite the imaginative arguments some originalists have put forward in defense of Trump’s order, my expectation is that when the case eventually reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, the court will find that it violates the 14th Amendment. If that happens, those who want to restrict birthright citizenship will have no choice but to amend the Constitution.
