Please support DU during Summer Fund Drive Week, August 18-25 2025!

Pick Your
Battles
Get Ur Rest
Look for Joy
We have
A Big Fight
Ahead

You still
have time to
to send some
money DU`s
way. Support
the summer
fund drive!

I have
DU friends
everywhere.

Rebellions
are built
on HOPE

DU
keeps
HOPE
alive

Thank you

EarlG

Check out
all the stickies
on Grovelbot's
Big Board!

Latest Breaking News

tulipsandroses

(7,854 posts) Wed Jul 23, 2025, 08:57 PM Jul 23

Trump's birthright citizenship order is unconstitutional, appeals court says

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Lasher (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: CBS.COM

A federal appeals court said Wednesday that President Trump's executive order curtailing birthright citizenship is unconstitutional.

The policy, which has been the subject of a complicated monthslong legal back-and-forth, is currently on hold. But Wednesday's decision appears to mark the first time that an appellate court has weighed in on the merits of Mr. Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship for many children of undocumented immigrants by executive order.

A panel of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit wrote that Mr. Trump's order is "invalid because it contradicts the plain language of the Fourteenth Amendment's grant of citizenship to 'all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.'"

This is a breaking story; it will be updated.

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/trumps-birthright-citizenship-order-unconstitutional-appeals-court/

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trump's birthright citizenship order is unconstitutional, appeals court says (Original Post) tulipsandroses Jul 23 OP

On to SCOTUS. We know that Clarence will vote in favor of Trump. OrlandoDem2 Jul 23 #1

Thomas might, but not the majority on the SC, because it would open the door that states can violate the lostincalifornia Jul 23 #2

Or they will agree with the dissenting trumpy judge and agree the plaintiff states have no standing Hassin Bin Sober Jul 23 #3

formal citizenship on a per state basis would mean BadgerKid Jul 24 #5

8 - 1 Curtailing birthright citizenship is unconstitutional. speak easy Jul 23 #4

Locking LBN dupe. Lasher Jul 24 #6

It didn't get locked /nt progree Jul 24 #7

OrlandoDem2

(3,075 posts)

1. On to SCOTUS. We know that Clarence will vote in favor of Trump.

Reply to tulipsandroses (Original post)

Wed Jul 23, 2025, 09:03 PM

Jul 23

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

lostincalifornia

(4,213 posts)

2. Thomas might, but not the majority on the SC, because it would open the door that states can violate the

Reply to OrlandoDem2 (Reply #1)

Wed Jul 23, 2025, 09:23 PM

Jul 23

Constitution.

What the SC will probably do though is take the case and delay the ruling, even perhaps lifting the injunction until they rule on it.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Hassin Bin Sober

(27,213 posts)

3. Or they will agree with the dissenting trumpy judge and agree the plaintiff states have no standing

Reply to lostincalifornia (Reply #2)

Wed Jul 23, 2025, 10:31 PM

Jul 23

The trumpy judge is saying, among other things, we can’t possibly know how much damage the order will do until it’s implemented. In other words it’s not ripe for the courts.

Trumpy judge is also buying the trump claim the states are not injured because they aren’t automatically entitled to federal funds payable based on the new citizen and any dispersal will be self inflicted harm.

In other words, they intend to delay via process. As per usual.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

BadgerKid

(4,891 posts)

5. formal citizenship on a per state basis would mean

Reply to lostincalifornia (Reply #2)

Thu Jul 24, 2025, 12:17 AM

Jul 24

Migrations, likely to blue states. I can’t imagine that would happen again in our country. So far, this ICE sh!t seems to be working out for the radicalized GOP.