The Supreme Court convened today to hear oral arguments concerning President Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, a right guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The case centers around the interpretation of the clause stating, “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

President Trump Attends Historic Hearing

President Donald Trump made a historic appearance at the Supreme Court, potentially becoming the first sitting president to attend oral arguments. Experts, including Professor Adam Winkler of UCLA School of Law, confirmed that there is no record of a president previously attending such a hearing. The Supreme Court Historical Society also has no record of a president ever attending an oral argument.

Background of the Executive Order

The arguments stem from an executive order signed by President Trump over a year ago, aiming to revoke automatic citizenship for children born in the United States to non-citizens. The President stated he attended because he has “listened to this argument for so long.” He also expressed mixed opinions about the justices, stating, “I love a few of them. I don’t like some others,” and criticizing conservative justices for rulings against him.

Previous Legal Challenges

Prior to reaching the Supreme Court, Trump’s birthright citizenship order faced repeated defeats in lower courts. Judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents consistently ruled the policy unconstitutional and in violation of federal law. One judge appointed by Ronald Reagan described the order as “blatantly unconstitutional,” while another, appointed by Barack Obama, stated it “runs counter to our nation’s 250-year history of citizenship by birth.”

Limited Support in Lower Courts

Even when arguments supporting Trump gained some traction, judges often focused on procedural issues rather than the policy's legality. For example, Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, questioned whether the states challenging the order had the legal standing to bring the lawsuit.

Justices' Diverse Backgrounds

The nine justices presiding over the case each have unique ancestral backgrounds. Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s ancestors trace back to 1800s Puerto Rico, while Chief Justice John Roberts’ lineage leads to a coal mining village in England. Justices Elena Kagan and Samuel Alito also have immigrant roots. Their diverse backgrounds will inform their consideration of the case.

Arguments and Expectations

The Justice Department is represented by Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who has earned President Trump’s favor through previous legal victories. Sauer is also considered a potential Supreme Court nominee. However, legal analysts, like Steve Vladeck of Georgetown University Law Center, suggest the case is “remarkably weak,” given existing precedent and congressional action. Some administration officials privately acknowledge a potential defeat.