Supreme Court seems poised to reject Trump's birthright citizenship limits as he attends arguments (apnews.com)

submitted 4 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Supreme Court seemed poised Wednesday to reject Donald Trump’s restrictions on birthright citizenship in a consequential case that was magnified by his unparalleled presence in the courtroom.

Conservative and liberal justices questioned whether Trump’s order declaring that children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens comports with either the Constitution or federal law.

Arguments lasted more than two hours in a crowded courtroom that included not only Trump, the first sitting president to attend arguments at the nation’s highest court, but also Attorney General Pam Bondi and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and in seats reserved for the justices’ guests, actor Robert De Niro.

top 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

This point I read in a related CNN article made me literally go WTF:

During a somewhat awkward exchange with conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, Solicitor General D. John Sauer struggled to say definitively whether he thought Native American children born today would be entitled to birthright US citizenship under the type of ruling he’s asking the Supreme Court to issue.

Native Americans are the ORIGINAL Americans!! As if the murder and suffering of their ancestors, the theft of their land, and the discrimination many of them face today isn't enough... now these suited clowns in DC are questioning whether newborn native Americans should automatically get citizenship?! The fucking audacity!

Of course, we all know why these scumbags want to disenfranchise native Americans: because they aren't white and Christian enough for their liking.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago

I'm so tired of having to learn how this ONE STUPID ASSHOLE does or does not get his way with fucking up our country.

I'm trying to think if there will be anyone mourning him when he's gone.

[-] Sciaphobia@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 weeks ago

I think at this point anyone still supporting him is going to be devastated when their orange god shits it. Pretty much only ride or die types there anymore.

They give lip service to not supporting one thing or another, but there always maintain they'd never have voted for anyone opposing him, so. Seems to me that you kinda have to be all in at this point, whatever you say.

[-] bradinutah@thelemmy.club 1 points 4 weeks ago

So nothing better for the fascist Donvict to do than to go attend this hearing to further enhance his desire for an upper Epstein class. Same with Bondi. What a waste of taxpayers' money and time. Incompetent governance!Shame on the Republican Senators and House Reps that support this administration!

this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026

17 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29593 readers

225 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News