What Parents Need to Know as Birthright Citizenship Case Reaches Supreme Court

I dunno. Back before epidemiology and vaccines and public health a lot of parents lost one or more along the way. Thank god we have … oh.

Let’s be fair, one man doesn’t get to change the Constitution on a whim. Nine judges do. This was always going to the Court. And the Court can absolutely change the century-old interpretation. It’s why 2016 was a very important election. Whoops!

The Court should be extra funny and agree with their interpretation but then carry it to the logical conclusion that all immigrant children have diplomatic immunity and thus can not be charged with any crimes or removed from the country.

Read the EO. It answers your question. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/ First off, the U.S. *already* does citizenship by blood for children born outside our borders. And all this changes for children born within the U.S. is that one parent must have, at a minimum, legal permanent residency to grant the child citizenship. So yes. All this does is bring our citizenship by birth policy into parity with most wealthy developed nations. A majority of nations, in fact. The policy on its face isn’t really an issue. Implementing it via executive/judicial fiat, in contradiction to the fairly obvious language of the Constitution (and over a century of precedent on that language) is a real issue, yes. Not to mention the other issues for non-citizens/residents that reinterpreting “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” can have. This EO is a nightmare on several levels. But the actual citizenship policy in it? Mostly fine. Works for most countries, including progressive European nations.

> I don't see how this passes muster even with this supreme court. I admire your optimism. *Wong Kim Ark* wasn’t unanimous, I can 100% see this court splitting 5-4 to reverse it. This court was *built* to do this. > That being said you shouldn’t be able to fly into the country at 9 months pregnant have a baby and then leave with him/her having citizenship. Birthright citizenship is a flawed policy. I think “flawed” is a bit much, but otherwise agree. It’ll farm you downvotes because of how polarized this topic is, but yeah much like gun control and universal healthcare there’s no reason citizenship by blood can’t work here. “American exceptionalism” is nearly always stupid and this isn’t an exception. The UK and Germany and Spain don’t offer citizenship to the children of tourists, and it’s *fine.* There’s nothing particularly bad about the policy itself. If a *Constitutional amendment* were proposed making the change, I’d be absolutely fine with it…though I don’t think it’s particularly necessary either. Doing it by executive and judicial fiat, and reversing a century of precedent to achieve that, is the problem.

If it spent half the budget on THAT, we wouldn’t have a healthcare issue