Source: Fox News
Summary
A group of law professors, including Ilan Wurman, Randy Barnett, and Philip Hamburger, have argued in favor of former President Donald Trump’s effort to narrow the interpretation of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. They claim that the amendment never intended to grant citizenship to babies born to illegal immigrants. The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments on the case, with some justices signaling skepticism towards Trump’s order. The case has sparked polarizing debate, with some arguing that it could strip citizenship from those ineligible for it and shift immigration policy.
Our Reading
As expected, the matter has reached another stage.
The law professors’ campaign has gained attention, with some arguing that birthright citizenship is not a settled matter. Ilan Wurman notes that the Supreme Court cannot simply rely on conventional wisdom. The case has invited polarizing debate, with some arguing that it could have significant implications for immigration policy. The justices’ reactions during oral arguments have been telling, with Chief Justice John Roberts challenging the Solicitor General’s arguments. The ACLU has argued that the policy is enshrined in the 14th Amendment to “put it out of reach of any government official”.
The professors siding with Trump’s executive order have been met with “swift and vicious” reactions, with some labeling the effort as a “joke”.
