Table of Contents
A panel of three judges of the Boston -based court of appeal expressed a deep skepticism as to the arguments of the Ministry of Justice of President Donald Trump while the administration seeks to cancel the citizenship of the law of birth, according to Reuters.
Why it matters
Trump’s decree, signed on the day of the inauguration in January, seeks to restrict citizenship of the dawn and could potentially affect the rights of millions of children born in the United States. The order orders US agencies to refuse citizenship to children unless a parent is an American citizen or a legal permanent resident.
The node of the question is in the interpretation of the 14th amendment, which will determine whether the constitutional guarantee of citizenship for children born on American soil to non -citizen or undocumented parents remains intact.
The case has already been presented to the courtyard of the 9th circuit based in San Francisco, which judged last month that the order was unconstitutional, confirming a decision of the basant court which blocked the national application.
Stock photo – Getty Images
What to know
Friday, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Boston, toasted the lawyer for the Ministry of Justice, Eric Mcarthur, on the main arguments of the position of the administration on the citizenship of birth law, which reiterated the argument of Trump according to which the 14th amendment was only supposed to citizenship to the children of former slaves – nor the children of the country in the country in the country in the country in the country in the country or unlimited.
The judges, all appointed by Democratic presidents, underlined the decision of the Supreme Court United States c. Wong Kim ArkThis guaranteed citizenship to any child born in the country of non -citizens.
The United States chief, David Barron, thought that judges “are not free to ignore” the previous decision of the Supreme Court.
Shankar Duraiswamy, lawyer for New Jersey, argued before the court that the Supreme Court “on several occasions, children born to people who are here illegally or who are here on a temporary basis are nevertheless citizens of the right of birth”.
While the Supreme Court ruled in June in favor of limiting national injunctions, it has enabled certain exceptions within the limits of a certified segment of people so that collective appeals retain this power.
The American district judge Leo Sorokin of the Massachusetts in July judged that a national injunction previously granted against the order of Trump could remain in place, even in the light of the new restrictions of the Supreme Court, because “no effective and narrower alternative” would give reparation to the applicants.
During the same month, a New Hampshire court also acted in the new decision to certify a national class of complainants, which included all children born on American soil. The Trump administration sought to appeal this decision alongside Sorokin.
What people say
Judge Patrick Bumatay, who dissident in the decision of the 9th circuit, wrote: “We must approach any request for universal relief with good faith skepticism, aware that the invocation of” complete relief “is not a door stolen from universal injunctions.”
The former state prosecutor of Palm Beach, Dave Aronberg, via X, formerly Twitter, at Nowsweek In July: “Easy decision. If President Trump wants to eliminate citizenship from the right of birth, he must change the constitution. But he cannot repeal the language of the 14th amendment via the executive decree.”
Representative Claudia Tenney, a Republican from New York, published on Wednesday at X: “Citizenship of the right of birth has never been supposed to be a reward for having violated our immigration laws. The law on the clarification of constitutional citizenship is clear: no citizenship for children born of illegal foreigners, foreign spies or terrorists.”
What happens next
Legal experts and general prosecutors provide for the possible examination of the Supreme Court will provide a historic decision on the meaning of the 14th amendment – a decision that could reshape the rights of children born on American soil and the future of American immigration policy.
This article includes the reports of the Associated Press.
