Washington, DC — Today, ahead of the Supreme Court’s landmark hearing on birthright citizenship, a new guest post on the America’s Voice Substack by America’s Voice legal advisor David Leopold delivers a must-read analysis and preview of the arguments and implications (find on Substack here and excerpted below).
Vanessa Cárdenas, Executive Director of America’s Voice, also previewed today’s hearing and implications:
“For 250 years, America has been shaped by immigrants from every part of the globe and become a beacon of hope and opportunity for the world. The 14th Amendment is fundamental to this American story and a cherished protection that has allowed generations of children of immigrants to become fully contributing Americans rather than remain in the shadows as a permanent underclass. That is my story, and the story of every American who is a descendant of an immigrant, including every Justice sitting on the Supreme Court bench today.
The fact that the Trump Administration is now taking aim at a 14th amendment that moved America closer to realizing its founding principles that all people are created equal is a disturbing reminder of the motivations of President Trump and Stephen Miller. We look to the Supreme Court to rise to the moment and reaffirm our history and our values, and to uphold the concept of a nation built on the premise of E Pluribus Unum – Out of Many, One.”
Read America’s Voice Contributor David Leopold’s Guest Substack “The Fight Over Birthright Citizenship Heads to the Supreme Court” on AV’s Substack and find key excerpts below:
The debate over birthright citizenship is no longer a theoretical exercise confined to campaign trail rhetoric. What was once a fringe proposal championed by restrictionists in Congress has now become a central legal and political battle reaching the highest court in the land. As the Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the issue in Trump v. Barbara, it is worth examining what is truly at stake — not just for immigration policy, but for the foundational principles of American civil rights.
For the full Substack click here.
WHAT IS REALLY AT STAKE
The implications of stripping birthright citizenship from the Constitution are as far-reaching as they are disturbing. If constitutional citizenship were limited to the children of U.S. citizens and green card holders, a cascade of troubling questions would follow. Would physicians be required to report pregnancy and maternity information to immigration authorities? Would ICE agents be stationed in hospitals? Would existing U.S. citizens face denaturalization? Would Americans be required to produce not only their own papers, but those of their parents? And perhaps most chillingly, would millions of American-born children be rendered stateless?
According to the Migration Policy Institute, repealing birthright citizenship would increase the undocumented population by an additional 2.7 million by 2045 and by 5.4 million by 2075. These individuals would be forced into an underclass — denied access to health care and basic services, vulnerable to exploitation and abuse, and subject to constant risk of deportation through no fault of their own.
Far from solving the nation’s immigration challenges, eliminating birthright citizenship would make America’s already fractured immigration system dramatically worse, at an enormous humanitarian cost.
THE TRUE INTENT
The absurdity of the “anchor baby” narrative reveals the true purpose of the assault on constitutional citizenship. This is not a serious policy proposal aimed at fixing the immigration system. It is a signal of cruelty directed at the children of immigrants, and it serves a more nefarious goal: relegating those children into a permanent underclass, forever subject to exploitation by unscrupulous employers. It also places children who were born and raised in this country, and who are currently guaranteed citizenship, at risk of denaturalization, detention, and deportation.
It is also critical to acknowledge the uncomfortable reality that long-standing precedent may not be enough to protect this fundamental right. There is little evidence to suggest that the current Supreme Court’s hard-core conservative majority would approach this issue free of political or ideological bias. The comforting assumption that settled law will hold must be tempered by the recognition that the Court has shown a willingness to revisit and overturn established precedent in recent years.
A DEFINING MOMENT
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has very little to do with immigration at its core. It is fundamentally about the preservation of civil rights. Any effort to end birthright citizenship — whether through elimination or reinterpretation of the Citizenship Clause — comes at the grave cost of abridging those rights, echoing the dark era of Dred Scott, when human beings were treated as commodities.
As the Supreme Court takes up this issue, the nation must confront what kind of country it wants to be. The answer to that question will define not only the future of immigration law, but the meaning of American citizenship itself.
