Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on Ending Birthright Citizenship

Professor of Constitutional Law James Sample and Director of the Law School’s Deportation Defense Clinic Alexander Holtzman at the Maurice A. Deane School of Law were interviewed by Newsday for a report on President Donald Trump’s plan to end birthright citizenship for hundreds of thousands of children of parents here illegally or temporarily.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments from Trump administration lawyers that the Citizenship Clause of the U.S. Constitution was never intended to grant citizenship universally to everyone born in the country.

Professor Sample said the administration’s case lacked merit. The clearest precedent, he said, was an 1898 Supreme Court case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

He said, “That established clearly that, in the Supreme Court’s view, the language of the 14th Amendment meant that a child born in the United States, including to immigrants, whether documented or not, was a citizen.” He also added that a ruling that overturned this precedent would mark a fundamental change to the American identity.

“The notion of birthright citizenship is one of the things that distinguishes us from other countries where citizenship is often a function of lineage,” he said.

Professor Holtzman told Newsday that the case was creating anxiety for people who could be negatively affected by a court ruling, which could come as early as this summer.

“I’ve had clients who’ve asked me, ‘Are my children safe, or who are pregnant and wonder if their children will be safe.”