Birthright Citizenship Upheld

FOR JOINING US. THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP. THE LANDMARK DECISION STRIKING DOWN PRESIDENT TRUMP'S EXECUTIVE ORDER TO DENY CITIZENSHIP TO CHILDREN OF UNDOCUMENTED OR TEMPORARY IMMIGRANTS. YESTERDAY IN A 6 TO 3 VOTE, THE SUPREME COURT UPHELD A BROADER CONCEPTION OF BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP ON CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS. THE COURT RULING THAT BABIES BORN ON U.S. SOIL ARE AUTOMATICALLY SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES. CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS WROTE THE MAJORITY OPINION SAYING, QUOTE, THE FRAMERS OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT EXTENDED THAT PROMISE TO EVERY FREE BORN PERSON IN THIS LAND. WGC USED. MIKE BRAUN HAS MORE. >> FOR MORE ON THE LANDMARK DECISION BY THE SUPREME COURT ABOUT BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP, WE'RE JOINED NOW BY BETHANY KHAN GRAD, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AT FGCU. BETHANY SPECIALIZES IN FLORIDA POLITICS. THE PRESIDENCY AND THE SUPREME COURT. BETHANY, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. THANKS FOR HAVING ME. CAN YOU TAKE US BACK TO THE ORIGINATION OF THIS LAWSUIT BACK TO THE EXECUTIVE ORDER PRESIDENT TRUMP SIGNED WHEN HE STARTED HIS SECOND TERM. >> YES. SO ON THE VERY FIRST DAY OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SECOND TERM, HE SIGNED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT WOULD CHANGE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT AND THE CITIZENSHIP CLAUSE THAT INCLUDES CURRENTLY THE 14TH AMENDMENT HAS. WE'VE UNDERSTOOD IT SINCE ITS WRITING EXTEND CITIZENSHIP TO ANY CHILD THAT'S BORN ON U.S. SOIL, RIGHT? WITH VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS, THE EXECUTIVE ORDER WOULD CHANGE THAT. SO INSTEAD ONLY EXTEND THAT CITIZENSHIP TO CHILDREN WHO HAD EITHER TO PARENTS WHO ARE CITIZENS OF THE U.S. OR AT LEAST ONE WHO HAS A SET OF CITIZEN OF THE U.S. OR AT LEAST ONE PARENT HAD LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENCY LIKE A GREEN CARD. AND SO THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER WOULD HAVE CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY. AND THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT WOULD BE APPLIED. DOES THAT RETROACTIVE RIGHT? PEOPLE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. SO IMMEDIATELY THERE ARE COURT CASES BROUGHT IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT STATES BY A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE. AND IT WORKED ITS WAY UP THE LEGAL SYSTEM UNTIL IT REACHED THE SUPREME COURT. AND THERE'S ALSO ULTIMATELY THE SUPREME COURT HAD TO ANSWER WHETHER OR NOT THE EXECUTIVE ORDER COULD STAND IN THE FACE OF THE CONSTITUTION. >> FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL STANDPOINT IN THE 14TH AMENDMENT. WHAT WITH ADJUSTS HIS GRAPPLING WITH WHEN IT CAME TO WHO IS A CITIZEN AND WHO IS NOT? >> SO ULTIMATELY WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT WAS WHETHER THE EXECUTIVE ORDER COULD STAND WITH THE TEXT OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT BEING WHAT IT WAS RIGHT. AND THAT PHRASE WITHIN THE 14TH AMENDMENT THAT SAYS THE SUB SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF GOT A LOT OF ATTENTION AT THE PHRASE. THE MOST PEOPLE HAVE NEVER REALLY HEARD OF BEFORE. BUT THAT QUESTION OF SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF IS REALLY WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT BECAUSE THE QUESTIONS THE JUSTICES SEEMED TO BE LOOKING AT WAS DOES THAT CITIZENSHIP EXTENDS TO ANYONE WHO IS BORN IN THE U.S. OR DO THEY HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF LOYALTY TO THE U.S. HAS SOME SORT OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE U.S. AND KIND OF FIRST TAKE ANY OTHER ALLEGIANCES THAT COULD COME. SO THAT WAS THE BIG QUESTION THAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT. WE SAW THE JUSTICES HAD DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF IT. ONCE WE GOT THEIR ANSWERS EARLIER TODAY. SO IT REALLY CAME DOWN TO WHETHER THE 14TH AMENDMENT ALLOWED FOR CHANGES THAT WE'RE GOING TO COME WITH THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER. AND THEN EVEN SOME CONGRESSIONAL STATUTES GOT BROUGHT INTO AND CERTAIN OF CERTAIN SUPREME A PAIN TO COME. >> IT WAS A DIVIDED COURT DECISION WITH 3 JUSTICES SIDING WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP'S EXECUTIVE ORDER. HOWEVER, CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS WROTE IN FAVOR OF BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP FROM YOUR EXPERTISE TO THE SUPREME COURT. WHAT MESSAGE DOES THAT SEND? >> WHATEVER THE CHIEF JUSTICE WRITES AN OPINION. IT ALWAYS SIGNALS THAT THIS WAS A REALLY IMPORTANT CASE, RIGHT? IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE MOST SENIOR JUSTICE IN THE MAJORITY GETS TO ASSIGN THE CASE AND ASSIGN THE OPINION WRITER. SO THE FACT THAT THE CHIEF JUSTICE TOOK THAT CASE FOR HIMSELF DEFINITELY SENDS A MESSAGE THAT HE THOUGHT THIS WAS VERY IMPORTANT AND ESPECIALLY GOING INTO A MIDTERM ELECTION YEAR WITH THE CHIEF JUSTICE BEING SUCH AN INSTITUTIONAL LIST. HE CARE SO MUCH. NOT JUST ABOUT THE COURT GETTING IT RIGHT, BUT ALSO WHAT THE PUBLIC THINKS OF THE COURT AND PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF THE COURT. IT DEFINITELY SENDS A MESSAGE THAT THE CHIEF REALLY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE HAD CONFIDENCE THAT THE DECISION THAT WAS BEING MADE WAS BEING MADE SOUNDLY AND THAT THEIR LOGIC WAS SPELLED OUT VERY CLEARLY IN THE DECISION THAT THEY HAD IT OUT. >> NOW THAT THE COURT HAS MADE, THIS IS HIS DECISION. DO YOU THINK THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT WILL BE REVISITED ANYTIME SOON BY FUTURE ADMINISTRATIONS? >> I DON'T THINK WE'RE DONE WITH IT NOW. >> WITH WITH WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID EARLIER TODAY AFTER HE HEARD THE DECISION, HE SEEMS TO JUST TURN HIS ATTENTION TO CONGRESS. NOW, NOW THAT THE COURTS DIDN'T NECESSARILY RULE IN HIS FAVOR ON THIS ISSUE, HE SEEMS TO BE TURNING HIS ATTENTION TO CONGRESS AND SUGGESTING THAT OF CONGRESS JUST PASSES A LAW. THE CHANGES WHAT CITIZENSHIP MEANS ACCORDING TO THE 14TH AMENDMENT, THEN HE CAN SIGN IT INTO LAW AND THEN WE STILL GET THE SAME OUTCOME THAT HE WANTED. SO IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE'RE DONE WITH IT. NOW, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS A CONVERSATION THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE. AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS FOR THE REST OF TRUMP'S TERM, I DO THINK THAT THERE IS A CONVERSATION THAT HAS BEEN OPENED UP NOW ABOUT WHAT BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP REALLY MEANS NOW AND THEN MOVING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE. THAT ANY CAR IT. >> THANK YOU FOR JOINING US COURSE.