{"id":1859799,"date":"2026-04-01T16:55:27","date_gmt":"2026-04-01T13:55:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=1859799"},"modified":"2026-04-01T16:55:27","modified_gmt":"2026-04-01T13:55:27","slug":"us-birthright-citizenship-expanded-in-the-late-19th-century","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=1859799","title":{"rendered":"US birthright citizenship expanded in the late 19th century"},"content":{"rendered":"

[analyse_image type=”featured” src=”https:\/\/static.dw.com\/image\/76629944_6.jpg”]<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
https:\/\/p.dw.com\/p\/5BX72<\/span><\/div>\n<\/section>\n
Outside of the court, protesters gathered with signs supporting birthright citizenship and rejecting TrumpImage: Bryan Dozier\/ZUMA\/picture alliance<\/small><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

US<\/a> President Donald Trump<\/a> made a rare and historic appearance at the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, where he watched his administration’s lawyer, Solicitor General John Sauer, challenge the constitutionality of birthright citizenship<\/a> during oral arguments.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office stripping citizenship from children of undocumented immigrants<\/a>, effectively tying citizenship to parents’ legal status in the US.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But the order clashed with the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, ratified in 1868, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”<\/p>\n

The birthright citizenship order has been rejected by every lower court that has considered it<\/a>. It now stands before the Supreme Court, where a definitive ruling on the issue is expected in June.<\/p>\n

Trump becomes first sitting president to attend Supreme Court hearing<\/h2>\n

Trump is the first sitting president to attend oral arguments. The last time presidents visited the court and argued cases before it was in the 19th century, but all of them did so after leaving office.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Trump sat in the first row and was joined by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, both listened to the proceedings at the courthouse for a little more than an hour and a half. Outside of the court, protesters gathered with signs supporting birthright citizenship and rejecting Trump.<\/p>\n

Sauer argued to the court that “unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations” and “demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.”<\/p>\n

“It operates as a powerful pull factor for illegal immigration and rewards illegal aliens who not only violate the immigration laws but also jump in front of those who follow the rules,” he said.<\/p>\n

\"US
Trump attended the hearing to listen to his lawyer give his arguments on the caseImage: Shawn Thew\/UPI Photo\/picture alliance<\/small><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Court casts doubt over Trump’s case<\/h2>\n

Both conservative and liberal justices grilled Sauer over Trump’s order, with justices asking about the legal basis for the order and voicing practical concerns about its implementation.<\/p>\n

“Are you suggesting that when a baby is born people have to have documents? Present documents? Is this happening in the delivery room? How are we determining when or whether a newborn child is a citizen of the United States under your rule?” liberal Justice Ketanji Jackson asked Sauer.<\/p>\n

Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts told Sauer that limiting who qualifies for citizenship at birth based on the 14th Amendment language “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” seemed “quirky.”<\/p>\n

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh also suggested that federal citizenship laws support broad birthright citizenship in the US.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas, the most likely among the nine justices to side with Trump, pointed out that the purpose of the amendment was to grant citizenship to Black people, including freed slaves.<\/p>\n

“How much of the debates around the 14th Amendment had anything to do with immigration?” he asked.<\/p>\n

ACLU says US follows English common law<\/h2>\n

Sauer argued to the court that with birthright citizenship the US is an “outlier among modern nations,” pointing to places in Europe who don’t allow birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n

Cecillia Wang, the American Civil Liberties Union legal fighting against the government, argued that the US follows English common law, which provides for citizenship based on the legal concept of jus soli, or “right of soil.”<\/p>\n

She noted that when the issue was brought up in 1898 by “largely the same grounds they raised today, this court said no,” adding that “this court held that the 14th Amendment embodies the English common law rule: Virtually everyone born on US\u00a0soil is subject to its jurisdiction and is a citizen.”<\/p>\n

Edited by: Alex Berry<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

US birthright citizenship expanded in the late 19th century<\/h2>\n

\n

US<\/a> President Donald Trump<\/a> made a rare and historic appearance at the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, where he watched his administration’s lawyer, Solicitor General John Sauer, challenge the constitutionality of birthright citizenship<\/a> during oral arguments.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office stripping citizenship from children of undocumented immigrants<\/a>, effectively tying citizenship to parents’ legal status in the US.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But the order clashed with the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, ratified in 1868, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”<\/p>\n

The birthright citizenship order has been rejected by every lower court that has considered it<\/a>. It now stands before the Supreme Court, where a definitive ruling on the issue is expected in June.<\/p>\n

Trump becomes first sitting president to attend Supreme Court hearing<\/h2>\n

Trump is the first sitting president to attend oral arguments. The last time presidents visited the court and argued cases before it was in the 19th century, but all of them did so after leaving office.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Trump sat in the first row and was joined by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, both listened to the proceedings at the courthouse for a little more than an hour and a half. Outside of the court, protesters gathered with signs supporting birthright citizenship and rejecting Trump.<\/p>\n

Sauer argued to the court that “unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations” and “demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.”<\/p>\n

“It operates as a powerful pull factor for illegal immigration and rewards illegal aliens who not only violate the immigration laws but also jump in front of those who follow the rules,” he said.<\/p>\n

\"US
Trump attended the hearing to listen to his lawyer give his arguments on the caseImage: Shawn Thew\/UPI Photo\/picture alliance<\/small><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Court casts doubt over Trump’s case<\/h2>\n

Both conservative and liberal justices grilled Sauer over Trump’s order, with justices asking about the legal basis for the order and voicing practical concerns about its implementation.<\/p>\n

“Are you suggesting that when a baby is born people have to have documents? Present documents? Is this happening in the delivery room? How are we determining when or whether a newborn child is a citizen of the United States under your rule?” liberal Justice Ketanji Jackson asked Sauer.<\/p>\n

Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts told Sauer that limiting who qualifies for citizenship at birth based on the 14th Amendment language “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” seemed “quirky.”<\/p>\n

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh also suggested that federal citizenship laws support broad birthright citizenship in the US.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas, the most likely among the nine justices to side with Trump, pointed out that the purpose of the amendment was to grant citizenship to Black people, including freed slaves.<\/p>\n

“How much of the debates around the 14th Amendment had anything to do with immigration?” he asked.<\/p>\n

ACLU says US follows English common law<\/h2>\n

Sauer argued to the court that with birthright citizenship the US is an “outlier among modern nations,” pointing to places in Europe who don’t allow birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n

Cecillia Wang, the American Civil Liberties Union legal fighting against the government, argued that the US follows English common law, which provides for citizenship based on the legal concept of jus soli, or “right of soil.”<\/p>\n

She noted that when the issue was brought up in 1898 by “largely the same grounds they raised today, this court said no,” adding that “this court held that the 14th Amendment embodies the English common law rule: Virtually everyone born on US\u00a0soil is subject to its jurisdiction and is a citizen.”<\/p>\n

Edited by: Alex Berry<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

US birthright citizenship expanded in the late 19th century<\/h2>\n

US<\/a> President Donald Trump<\/a> made a rare and historic appearance at the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, where he watched his administration’s lawyer, Solicitor General John Sauer, challenge the constitutionality of birthright citizenship<\/a> during oral arguments.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office stripping citizenship from children of undocumented immigrants<\/a>, effectively tying citizenship to parents’ legal status in the US.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But the order clashed with the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, ratified in 1868, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”<\/p>\n

The birthright citizenship order has been rejected by every lower court that has considered it<\/a>. It now stands before the Supreme Court, where a definitive ruling on the issue is expected in June.<\/p>\n

Trump is the first sitting president to attend oral arguments. The last time presidents visited the court and argued cases before it was in the 19th century, but all of them did so after leaving office.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Trump sat in the first row and was joined by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, both listened to the proceedings at the courthouse for a little more than an hour and a half. Outside of the court, protesters gathered with signs supporting birthright citizenship and rejecting Trump.<\/p>\n

Sauer argued to the court that “unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations” and “demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.”<\/p>\n

“It operates as a powerful pull factor for illegal immigration and rewards illegal aliens who not only violate the immigration laws but also jump in front of those who follow the rules,” he said.<\/p>\n

Both conservative and liberal justices grilled Sauer over Trump’s order, with justices asking about the legal basis for the order and voicing practical concerns about its implementation.<\/p>\n

“Are you suggesting that when a baby is born people have to have documents? Present documents? Is this happening in the delivery room? How are we determining when or whether a newborn child is a citizen of the United States under your rule?” liberal Justice Ketanji Jackson asked Sauer.<\/p>\n

Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts told Sauer that limiting who qualifies for citizenship at birth based on the 14th Amendment language “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” seemed “quirky.”<\/p>\n

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh also suggested that federal citizenship laws support broad birthright citizenship in the US.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas, the most likely among the nine justices to side with Trump, pointed out that the purpose of the amendment was to grant citizenship to Black people, including freed slaves.<\/p>\n

“How much of the debates around the 14th Amendment had anything to do with immigration?” he asked.<\/p>\n

Sauer argued to the court that with birthright citizenship the US is an “outlier among modern nations,” pointing to places in Europe who don’t allow birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n

Cecillia Wang, the American Civil Liberties Union legal fighting against the government, argued that the US follows English common law, which provides for citizenship based on the legal concept of jus soli, or “right of soil.”<\/p>\n

She noted that when the issue was brought up in 1898 by “largely the same grounds they raised today, this court said no,” adding that “this court held that the 14th Amendment embodies the English common law rule: Virtually everyone born on US\u00a0soil is subject to its jurisdiction and is a citizen.”<\/p>\n

Edited by: Alex Berry<\/em><\/p>\n

To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video<\/a><\/p>\n

[analyse_source url=”https:\/\/www.dw.com\/en\/us-supreme-court-debates-citizenship-with-rare-trump-visit\/a-76630576″]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[analyse_image type=”featured” src=”https:\/\/static.dw.com\/image\/76629944_6.jpg”] https:\/\/p.dw.com\/p\/5BX72 Outside of the court, protesters gathered with signs supporting birthright citizenship and rejecting TrumpImage: Bryan Dozier\/ZUMA\/picture alliance US President Donald Trump made a rare and historic appearance at the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, where he watched his administration’s lawyer, Solicitor General John Sauer, challenge the constitutionality of birthright citizenship during […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[226,74],"class_list":["post-1859799","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics","tag-crawlmanager","tag-dw-com"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1859799","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1859799"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1859799\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1859799"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1859799"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1859799"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}