{"id":575559,"date":"2026-04-01T17:14:12","date_gmt":"2026-04-01T17:14:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/575559\/"},"modified":"2026-04-01T17:14:12","modified_gmt":"2026-04-01T17:14:12","slug":"supreme-court-justices-appear-sceptical-over-trumps-changes-to-us-birthright-citizenship-rules-follow-live","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/575559\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court justices appear sceptical over Trump&#8217;s changes to US birthright citizenship rules &#8211; follow live"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/static.files.bbci.co.uk\/core\/website\/assets\/static\/news\/incident-types\/light-mode\/analysis.77b314ef10.svg\" alt=\"Analysis\" height=\"2.5rem\" width=\"9.8125rem\" draggable=\"false\" class=\"ssrcss-h608ny-ContributorImageComponent e2hr5uu0\"\/>A key question for the court: to rule based on Constitution, or on statutory grounds?published at 17:00 BST<\/p>\n<p>17:00 BST<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-qs9kpv-Contributor etflsgg2\"><img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/dc285c89-adc2-4f3d-ad5a-c311772563fa.jpg.webp.webp\" width=\"64\" height=\"64\" class=\"ssrcss-egie1y-Image edrdn950\"\/>Daniel Bush<br \/>Washington correspondent<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">The Supreme Court will have to decide whether to base its final<br \/>\nruling around the Constitution or legislation passed by Congress addressing<br \/>\nbirthright citizenship. <\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">That issue &#8212; whether the Court rules on constitutional or<br \/>\nstatutory grounds &#8212; is a key question among court watchers following today\u2019s<br \/>\nhearing. The question is critical because it\u2019ll help shape the scope of the<br \/>\nruling.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">If the court rules on constitutional grounds, it would represent a<br \/>\nmajor reinterpretation of US law and upend more than a century of precedent<br \/>\ndating all the way back to the 14th Amendment. A narrower ruling would likely<br \/>\nfocus on a 1952 immigration law passed by Congress that codified birthright<br \/>\ncitizenship status.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">The challenge, for the administration, stems from the fact that<br \/>\nCongress relied on the language in the 14th Amendment for its law giving<br \/>\nbirthright citizenship to most people born in the US. On this matter there is<br \/>\nvery little difference between the more recent law, and the constitution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">Solicitor General John Sauer argued that both were wrong. But<br \/>\nunder questioning from Justice Neil Gorsuch he acknowledged that the<br \/>\nadministration was seeking the broadest possible ruling.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">&#8220;This is a straight-up constitutional ruling you want from this<br \/>\ncourt, win, lose, or draw?&#8221; Gorsuch asked. \u201cYes,\u201d Sauer replied.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">That may be too big of an ask for the court. Already today,<br \/>\nseveral justices signaled they don\u2019t agree with Sauer\u2019s argument that the 14th<br \/>\nAmendment, later court rulings, and the 1950s-era law all got it wrong. The<br \/>\ncourt may be reluctant in the end to issue a major constitutional ruling that<br \/>\nfundamentally redefines the birthright citizenship process.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">Justice Brett Kavanaugh also raised the issue just a few minutes ago. \u201cOur usual practice is to resolve things on statutory grounds and not to do constitutional grounds,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p class=\"ssrcss-1q0x1qg-Paragraph e1jhz7w10\">Cecillia Wang, an ACLU attorney, replied that the plaintiffs have \u201ctwo paths to a win here,\u201d but urged the court to issue a broad ruling affirming the 14th Amendment and past court precedent.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A key question for the court: to rule based on Constitution, or on statutory grounds?published at 17:00 BST&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":575560,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[43,44,41,39,42,40],"class_list":{"0":"post-575559","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-headlines","8":"tag-headlines","9":"tag-news","10":"tag-top-news","11":"tag-top-stories","12":"tag-topnews","13":"tag-topstories"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/575559","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=575559"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/575559\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/575560"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=575559"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=575559"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=575559"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}