U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration on Friday turned to the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of the executive order seeking to eliminate birthright citizenship, marking the second time it has asked the justices to address the issue.
At least three federal judges have ruled against the Republican president’s attempt to eliminate birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented persons and immigrants on temporary visas, which contradicts the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which states that every person born in the U.S. is considered a citizen.
U.S. Attorney defends Trump order
In the appeal cited by CNN, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, believes that lower court decisions on the executive order signed by Trump on the second day of returning to office “undermine” border security.
“These decisions grant, without legal justification, the privilege of U.S. citizenship to hundreds of thousands of people who do not qualify.”
Sauer, lead appellate counsel for the U.S. executive, emphasized.
Insists on changing Amendment 14
This is the second time the White House has sought to have the top justices rule on a citizenship issue.
This follows Trump’s victory last June on the issue.
Although the Supreme Court’s decision on that occasion on the executive order did not address the merits of the executive order itself, but was confined to the jurisdiction of the lower courts and the legality in their decisions to block nationwide an executive order, it did represent an achievement in Trump’s attempts to change the interpretation of the 14th Amendment.
Questions citizenship by birth
Trump has insisted that this right enshrined in the Constitution “had to do with slave babies.”
And not with the children of the “thousands of people who are entering the country” because of this constitutional provision.
Last July, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California ruled against the executive order to limit birthright citizenship, the implementation of which is on hold nationwide while the cases are reviewed.
The appeal filed Friday with the Supreme Court refers to the California appeals court ruling and a contrary ruling by a New Hampshire judge.
With information from EFE
For more information, visit QuéOnnda.com
