Birthright citizenship, which gives U.S. citizenship even if it is born in the U.S. regardless of parents’ nationality, is expected to be confusing for the time being. This is because birthright citizenship is banned in 28 states in the U.S., including Texas, Virginia and Pennsylvania, and birthright citizenship is valid in 22 states, including Illinois, California and New York.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government in a lawsuit filed by the Donald Trump administration on the 27th, asking some federal judges to prevent the universal application of executive orders related to birth citizenship to the United States. Six Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor of the government said in their majority opinion, “The ruling of the lower court is limited to the relief of the litigants, and it is an abuse of authority to apply all over the United States.” However, the Supreme Court did not judge whether the executive order conforms to the Constitution.
Shortly after taking office on Jan. 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order restricting birthright citizenship for children born to foreign parents who illegally stay in the U.S. or do not have permanent residency. A few days later, federal judges in Democratic-leaning Seattle, Maryland and Massachusetts suspended the executive order, calling it “obviously unconstitutional.” At the same time, a nationwide injunction was issued to suspend the order nationwide, which the government sued for being too broad.
There are also many voices in the local legal community questioning the feasibility of the policy to restrict birth citizenship. Experts point out that, above all, birth citizenship is a provision stipulated in the U.S. Constitution, so there is no legal basis for restricting it only by an executive order from the president.
SAM KIM
US ASIA JOURNAL
