Suppose the child hates US: Justice Alito's dissent as Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship, whoever is born in US is a citizen
Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship. Which 3 judges dissented? Reactions to the Supreme Court order The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld birthright citizenship in a
Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship. Which 3 judges dissented? Reactions to the Supreme Court order The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld birthright citizenship in a 6-3 decision, striking down President Donald Trump's executive order to end it. Trump issued the executive order at the center of the case on January 20, 2025, shortly after he was sworn into office for a second term. It said that babies who are born in the United States to parents who are in this country either illegally or temporarily are not automatically entitled to citizenship. The Supreme Court ended the year-long debate and said whoever is born in the US is a citizen.In a dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito called the ruling both “one of the most important decisions in the history of the Court” and “a serious mistake.” Apart from Justice Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Neil Gorsuch also dissented from today's decision."Suppose that a person's only connection to this country is that he was born here to a mother who was present just long enough to give birth and then quickly return to her native country," Justice Alito said.
"Suppose that country is a strategic adversary or enemy of the United States. Suppose the child never visited the United States while growing up and was inculcated with hatred of this country. According to this court, now, that person is a citizen of the United States.He can enter and leave the country as he pleases. He can travel the world on a United States passport. Even if he plots to harm this country, he cannot be deprived of his status as a citizen, at least under current precedent," Justice Alito said.Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined five others in upholding birthright citizenship, but his reasoning was different. "In my view, the Executive Order does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment," he wrote in an opinion explaining his divergence. "The constitutional issue is not straightforward, much as we might want it to be."Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, and the architect of Trump's anti-immigration policies, called the ruling destructive and outrageous.
"American citizenship is not the birthright of the world. It belongs only and solely to Americans. No provision of the Constitution can be read to require our national self-obliteration," Miller said.“The Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship decision is wrong, dangerous, and disastrous for American sovereignty and the American people,” wrote GOP Senator Eric Schmitt. “If we can’t fix it with ordinary legislation, then we must do what the Constitution commands in moments of national crisis: We must amend the Constitution and restore American citizenship. We must again put ‘We the People’ first. … This ruling is the final alarm bell. ”“We are supposed to be a country, not an orphanage. You can’t jump our fence, give birth, cheat the system, and expect our taxpayers to raise your baby,” right-wing influencer and Charlie Kirk disciple Brilyn Hollyhand chimed.
The BriefWire