Birthright Citizenship: Why America’s Oldest Rule Is Under Attack
The Supreme Court’s Decision Could Redefine Who Is Considered an American
LEGAL PHILOSOPHY
Tejaswi Pandey
5/24/20262 min read
In a landmark case that could reshape the future of immigration and citizenship in the United States, the Supreme Court is considering how one can obtain citizenship. At the centre of this debate is a 157-year-old amendment, yet debated constantly. The president is trying to challenge it, and its outcome could have far-reaching consequences for millions of people. Today, I will explore what’s at stake, the legal arguments of both sides, and why this issue matters to every American
To understand the stakes of this case, it’s important to discuss the origins of birthright citizenship in the U.S. The fundamentals of this case lie in the 14th U.S. Amendment, which establish that Establishes that anyone born or naturalized in the U.S. is a citizen. Enacted after the Civil War, the amendment aimed to guarantee citizenship to formerly enslaved people and their descendants. As time has passed, it has become a keystone of American immigration policy.
The President’s legal argument is focused on the interpretation of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment. The administration argues that to obtain birthright citizenship, the parent should owe a direct, immediate obligation to the United States through legal domicile rather than just being merely present.
Whereas the opposition relies on the landmark case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, where the Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the U.S. to immigrant parents is a citizen. They argue that this settled case depicts the US’s 130 years of American legal tradition and that overturning it would undermine the country’s commitment to equality and inclusion.
If passed, this new law would affect millions of immigrants and the future of their children, leading to an increase in the population of unauthorized immigrants by 2.5 million people in just one decade. And the government needs to set up a system through which they have to verify the citizenship of Americans, and it would not only burden the government resources but also the American families, who all of a sudden now have to prove their citizenship.
This debate is not black and white. On one side, we have people who argue about stronger border control, anti-illegal immigration, and protecting the nation’s sovereignty, and on the other side, we have people who argue about the countries long standing commintiment to equal rights here. Both sides present valid concerns, whether security, resource allocation, fairness, or social cohesion. At last, the Supreme Court will not just settle this legal debate but also reflect the nation’s values and priorities in this fast-changing world