US Edition
Key takeaways from the historic Supreme Court debate on birthright citizenship
- The Supreme Court held a historic debate in 2025 over President Donald Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship in the United States.
- The case arose from controversy about the constitutionality and scope of birthright citizenship, with reports agreeing on the Supreme Court hearing date but differing on interpretations.
- The debate centered on whether the executive order could modify the 14th Amendment's guarantee of citizenship to anyone born on U.S. Soil, raising constitutional and immigration policy questions.
- Observers noted the significance of the court’s review, as it could affect millions of immigrants and reshape U.S. Citizenship laws, marking a major policy shift if upheld.
- The court’s forthcoming decision will have broad implications for immigration enforcement and citizenship rights, potentially altering long-established legal precedent.
158 Articles
158 Articles
Birthright citizenship and a post-constitutional order
The recent case before the Supreme Court on birthright citizenship points to a more fundamental constitutional crisis that has been called “post-constitutionalism.” We have reached the era in which the imperatives of the administrative state have replaced the formalism of the Constitution. The ideological liberals who advocated this radical change contend that the Constitution has been replaced by the administration with the deliberate purpose …
Supreme Court: Children of Illegal Aliens or Tourists are not U.S. Citizens
On the very day Donald Trump became president again, he signed an executive order prospectively eliminating birthright citizenship for children born to aliens unlawfully present in the United States. Immediately, lawsuits were filed in a half-doze...
Commentary: Ending birthright citizenship will mostly affect US citizens
The Trump administration’s executive order to limit birthright citizenship is a serious challenge to the 14th Amendment, which enshrined a radical principle of our democratic experiment: that anyone born here is an American. But the order will most affect average…
PragerU -- Heritage Foundation Legal Fellow: Birthright Citizenship ‘Inconsistent’ with Constitution
Universal birthright citizenship "isn't required by the 14th Amendment's text or historical context," Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation Amy Swearer assesses in a video released by PragerU on Monday. The post PragerU — Heritage Foundation Senior Legal Fellow: Birthright Citizenship ‘Inconsistent’ with Constitution appeared first on Breitbart.
Dick Polman: Trump’s hatred of birthright citizenship is one of his oldest cons
Say what you will about Trump (though it’s all been said before) — that he’s a tinpot totalitarian, pathological liar, corrupt grifter, convicted criminal, global laughingstock, and a snowflake whose skin is thinner than parchment. But sometimes we forget he’s also a man-child with some long-held convictions. Exhibit A — on display at the Supreme Court the other day — is his lawless quest to blow up a constitutional right that has been embedded …
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 45% of the sources are Center
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
Ownership
To view ownership data please Upgrade to Vantage
