Historic Arguments Before the High Court
The U.S. Supreme Court heard the oral arguments in a much-anticipated hearing which could affect the meaning of birth citizenship in the United States.
What the court is debating here is if there should be a new interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment in such a way that not every person born in the territory of the country would be a citizen, particularly the children of non-citizens.
The court was jam-packed with lawyers, advocates, and journalists as it considered its decisions with grave implications.
“This is probably one of the most significant issues facing the courts at present,” commented one professor of law. “This has to do with citizenship, identity, and the law.”
Revisiting a Constitutional Guarantee
This is because, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”
One must bear in mind that for more than 100 years now, this particular language has been freely interpreted to give citizenship regardless of who the child may be. It is the position of the government that “Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” needs to take on a different definition.
At the time of the proceedings in the Supreme Court, some of the Justices were reluctant about the interpretation that was being placed on it.
“What would that do to hundreds of years of jurisprudence?”
Government’s Case for Narrowing Citizenship
It should be noted that according to the lawyers representing the interests of the government, there is no constitutional requirement to grant citizenship to the children of individuals who have entered the country illegally.
In addition, the lawyers argue that the intention of those who wrote the Fourteenth Amendment was not to ensure universal application, considering the context of that time and the interpretation of that period of the nineteenth century.
“This is about restoring the original intention of the amendment,” the government lawyer told the court.
“The problem is that current law encourages illegal immigration, which puts pressure on our resources,” supporters of this position say.
“We need to restore the original intention of the law,” one of the advocates said outside the courtroom.
Challengers Defend Established Precedent
The advocates against the position taken by the government emphasized the strong connection birthright citizenship had with the Constitution as well as previous rulings made by the highest court of the land in 1898 in the famous case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark.
“This decision established that every individual born within the territorial boundaries of the US is a citizen,” the lawyer said on behalf of his clients. “There’s no grey area here.”
Any modification to this would cast doubt over the standing of millions of people and would be an infringement on one of the cornerstones of equality.
“You would effectively have two classes of people, those who were born here but are not citizens.”
Justices Signal Concerns
Courtesy Of Hiroko Bretz ( Flickr CC0)During the course of this heated discussion, justices of all political persuasions expressed their concerns regarding the consequences that would arise from any change in interpretation.
How would the government’s interpretation operate? How would they decide the status of citizenship at birth?
“‘What are we going to do with the baby in the hospital?’” said one of the justices. “‘Who decides that question, and on what grounds?’”
A few were skeptical of overturning long-standing precedents for reasons not sufficiently compelling.
“There is some value to stare decisis,” said yet another justice.
Broader Legal and Social Implications
The legal repercussions of this verdict might be far-reaching, according to legal professionals.
“This might alter the entire view of citizenship rights and civil rights as well,” said a constitutional lawyer.
The moment the court rules on limiting birthright citizenship, there will be a chain of consequences, from legal to logistical problems.
“This is not just a legal issue, but a logistical one too,” the lawyer remarked.
Public Reaction and Political Stakes
The debate has attracted a lot of public interest, and both sides have organized themselves into teams to support their cause in front of the courthouse.
According to the supporters of the position adopted by the government, there is a need for reform in order to address current immigration problems.
“This is a matter of justice and equality in terms of the law,” said one of the demonstrators.
However, according to the other side, this move is threatening one of the fundamental aspects of the American lifestyle.
“Birthright citizenship is the essence of equality,” said one of the leaders of the civil rights demonstrators.
Historical Context Weighs Heavily
Throughout the discussion, the Justices kept returning to history, thinking about the evolution of the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment through the years.
According to legal historians, the amendment took effect right after the Civil War in an attempt to grant citizenship to former slaves and their descendants.
“The amendment was meant to be all-encompassing,” one historian commented. “The history is crucial here.”
Interpreting the law differently would mean facing its history.
Decision
A decision is expected to be issued by the Supreme Court of the United States within the coming term.
Until that time, the existing statutes and previous rulings will continue to hold sway.
“‘This is a process that is going to take some time,’ says the law professor.”
A Defining Case for the Court
With the conclusion of the deliberations, it was clear that the decision would go down in history for both the court and the country.
“This is all about who belongs and who decides,” said the civil rights attorney.
Beyond deciding the fate of birthright citizenship, the decision would also reveal how the Supreme Court deals with precedent and how it interprets the Constitution when it comes to emerging societal concerns.
For the meantime, the entire nation holds its breath while the justices weigh a question which goes right at the heart of the identity of the country.
“History is being made here,” remarked the professor. “Whatever will happen, it’s going to be very big.”
By William Hernandez
Journalist for Vlixx Magazine, reporting on news from around the world, ensuring timely, accurate, and detailed information to keep the public informed and educated.
Sources:
CBS News: Supreme Court hears arguments in birthright citizenship case
CNBC News: Supreme Court hears birthright citizenship case with Trump in room
Featured and Inset Image Courtesy of Bill Flickr Page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image Courtesy of Hiroko Bretz Flickr Page- Creative Commons License
