Two dozen states rally behind Trump’s birthright citizenship SCOTUS petition

FIRST ON FOX: Almost all Republican attorneys normal requested the Supreme Court docket on Friday to facet with President Donald Trump in his combat to limit birthright rights. In doing so, they expressed broad help for one of many president’s most controversial agenda gadgets.

The 24 states, led by Brenna Hen of Iowa and Jonathan Skrmetti of Tennessee, argued in an amicus temporary that the 14th Modification, which covers birthright rights, was not supposed to mechanically grant citizenship to infants born to moms dwelling within the nation illegally or briefly visiting.

Prosecutors wrote that they’ve a novel curiosity in limiting birthright rights as a result of it encourages unlawful immigration, which they are saying has had unfavorable impacts on their states.

“Current years have seen an inflow of unlawful aliens – greater than 9 million – that has overwhelmed our nation’s infrastructure and its means to assimilate,” they wrote, including that their states subsequently face “important financial, well being, and public security challenges from insurance policies that present a ‘sturdy incentive for unlawful migration,’ … that goes past what the Citizenship Clause requires.”

HOW THE SUPREME COURT’S RULING PROMOTES TRUMP’S FIGHT FOR BIRTH RIGHT CITIZENSHIP

Protesters maintain up an indication exterior the Supreme Court docket in Washington, DC, June 27, 2025. (Alex Wroblewski/AFP through Getty Photographs)

The states are rallying behind Trump and the Supreme Court docket is anticipated to determine within the coming weeks whether or not to listen to the president’s petition, which argues that the Supreme Court docket ought to reinterpret the 150-year-old modification to strike down automated citizenship.

Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio and New Hampshire didn’t take part in Friday’s amicus temporary. Fox Information Digital reached out to their workplace for remark. Virginia Legal professional Basic Jason Miyares faces an in depth race for re-election within the blue-leaning state.

Skrmetti of Tennessee identified in a press release that the post-Civil Warfare Citizenship Modification was supposed to legally handle kids of individuals within the nation, together with previously enslaved folks.

“When you have a look at the regulation of the time, citizenship was hooked up to kids whose mother and father have been within the nation legally,” Skrmetti mentioned. “Each little one born on this nation is treasured, no matter their mother and father’ immigration standing, however not each little one is entitled to American citizenship. This case might permit the Supreme Court docket to resolve a constitutional query with far-reaching penalties for the states and our nation.”

Trump signed an govt order as quickly as he took workplace declaring that newborns born to sure non-citizen moms, together with these dwelling within the nation illegally, wouldn’t mechanically obtain citizenship except their father was a citizen.

The order instantly led to a number of lawsuits. In response to judges blocking this uniform, the Supreme Court docket dominated that nationwide orders, like these within the Birthright instances, have been unconstitutional.

However the Supreme Court docket left in place alternate options, together with class motion lawsuits, prompting plaintiffs to problem Trump’s order to refile their instances in a fashion in line with the justices’ order. The Supreme Court docket has not but dominated on the deserves of Trump’s plan.

SCOTUS RULES ON TRUMP’S BIRTH RIGHT CITIZENSHIP, TESTING THE POWERS OF THE LOWER LAW

President Donald Trump holds a signed govt order within the Oval Workplace of the White Home in Washington, January 23, 2025. (Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)

Decrease courtroom judges have mentioned Trump’s plan is far-fetched, regardless of Republicans exhibiting broad help for it.

Seattle-based federal Decide John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee, rebuked authorities attorneys throughout a listening to on the case earlier this 12 months.

Individuals show exterior the Supreme Court docket on Might 15, 2025 in Washington, DC. The courtroom heard arguments about decrease courts’ means to dam President Donald Trump’s coverage to finish birthright citizenship. (Matt McClain/The Washington Submit through Getty Photographs)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“It has change into more and more clear that the rule of regulation is merely an impediment to our president’s coverage objectives,” the choose mentioned. “The rule of regulation, he believes, is one thing that should be navigated round or just ignored, whether or not for political or private achieve.”

Coughenour mentioned that if Trump needed to alter the “distinctive American grant of birthright citizenship,” the president ought to work with Congress to amend the Structure quite than attempting to redefine the modification by means of an govt order.