The future of birthright citizenship in the United States moved to the center of a high-stakes legal battle Wednesday as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding an executive order from President Donald Trump aimed at ending the practice for children of undocumented immigrants.
The case has sparked intense debate among legal scholars, including George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley. Speaking Thursday on “Fox & Friends,” Turley characterized the continuation of the policy as a significant risk to the nation.
“The fact that we are one of the few countries that continues to embrace birthright citizenship is perfectly insane, and it is a great danger to this government and to this republic,” Turley stated.
Turley observed that the justices appeared to focus heavily on “originalism,” a judicial philosophy that interprets the Constitution based on its original meaning at the time it was written. The 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, ratified in 1868, was initially intended to guarantee citizenship to freed slaves and their descendants.
READ: Byron Donalds Rockets To Frontrunner Status As GOP Dominance Holds In New 2026 Florida Poll
According to Turley, even the court’s liberal wing seemed to adopt this historical lens during the proceedings. “What was really astonishing yesterday is it appeared that we might have nine originalists on the court,” Turley noted, pointing out that some justices who typically view the Constitution as a “living” document were suddenly emphasizing original intent. He argued that while these justices often view the Second Amendment with flexibility, they are treating the 14th Amendment’s language as a firm barrier.
Despite Turley’s concerns, the bench showed signs of skepticism toward the administration’s efforts to bypass Congress via executive order. Chief Justice John Roberts suggested to the solicitor general that the constitutional text regarding citizenship is explicit. Meanwhile, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh argued that American legal standards should be determined by domestic law rather than by comparing the U.S. to the policies of other nations.
On the social media platform Truth Social, President Trump defended his position by claiming that foreign entities are “selling citizenships” for financial gain. However, Chief Justice Roberts questioned the argument that birthright citizenship serves as a primary driver for illegal immigration or is being systematically exploited by foreign nationals.
Currently, the United States remains one of only 30 countries globally that maintains birthright citizenship without specific restrictions. While Turley maintains the issue is “existential,” the questioning from the justices suggests the court is weighing the executive branch’s authority against over a century of established legal interpretation.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
