The Trump administration has filed a request with the US Supreme Court, seeking permission to partially enforce restrictions on birthright citizenship while ongoing legal battles unfold.
This move follows an executive order signed by President Donald Trump after beginning his second term, which aims to limit birthright citizenship for children born in the US to parents who are in the country illegally.
This request has sparked debate over the constitutional implications of such an executive order, particularly concerning its potential violation of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the United States.
The administration’s appeal focuses not on the merits of the order itself, but on whether federal judges can block such policies on a nationwide scale.
Emergency Appeal Filed With the Supreme Court
The Trump administration’s appeal comes after district courts in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington issued rulings blocking the order. According to the Justice Department, these court decisions were overreaching, and individual judges should not be able to issue nationwide injunctions against presidential policies.
The administration has argued that such rulings are excessively broad and that the courts overstep their authority.
The policy in question, which is currently blocked nationwide, seeks to deny citizenship to children born after February 19 to parents who are in the country unlawfully. The executive order would also prohibit US agencies from recognizing the citizenship of these children.
According to Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris, this order is in line with constitutional principles, as the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause does not extend citizenship universally to all individuals born on US soil.
Legal Implications and Ongoing Legal Battles
A key part of the Trump administration’s request is the assertion that several federal appeals courts have already rejected their pleas to lift the block, highlighting the contentious nature of the issue. According to reports, three federal appeals courts, including one in Massachusetts earlier this week, upheld the injunctions that prevent the executive order from taking effect.
The administration’s appeal seeks to limit the effect of these rulings to only those individuals and groups directly involved in the lawsuits, which they argue have no standing to challenge the order on behalf of the public.
This case also brings into focus the broader issue of nationwide injunctions, which have become increasingly common in legal battles involving presidential policies. The Supreme Court has yet to rule on the scope of such injunctions, and this latest case may offer an opportunity for the court to address this contentious issue.
It remains unclear whether the court will grant the emergency request or allow the order to remain blocked while the case is being heard.
