Print 
PDF
On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court declared rogue lower courts’ universal injunctions against President Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship order to be unlawful.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who has disappointed in some rulings in the past, rose to the occasion.
She wrote, "[F]ederal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them. When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”
The issue of "birthright babies" is a big deal and is impacting a number of important cultural and financial issues in our country, including public education.
Be informed, not misled.
The final decision was 6-3, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh joining Barrett in the majority. Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.
What is birthright citizenship?
Known as Trump v. CASA, Inc., the matter before the high court centers around the issuance of nationwide injunctions on President Trump’s executive order seeking to end so-called “birthright citizenship.” That is a concept in which any individual born on American soil is automatically granted U.S. citizenship under the 14th Amendment, irrespective of whether that individual’s parents are legally permitted to be in the U.S.
The Supreme Court ruling did not determine the merits of Trump’s birthright citizenship order; however, it set the stage for a ruling on the problem of birthright citizenship.
In her majority opinion, Barrett noted that the injunctions brought before the Court “reflect a more recent development: district courts asserting the power to prohibit enforcement of a law or policy against anyone.”
“These injunctions — known as ‘universal injunctions,'” she wrote, “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.”
The Democrats have been systematically hand-picking far-left district judges to cooperate with them to stop President Trump from doing what he promised the American people he would do if we elected him.
The Supreme Court called them out on Friday by ruling that a single district judge cannot overrule the President of the United States in doing what he promised to do.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the high court’s Friday ruling “puts an end to the ‘increasingly common’ practice of federal courts issuing universal injunctions.”
So the injunctions are also stayed to the extent that they prohibit executive agencies from developing and issuing public guidance about the Executive’s plans to implement the Executive Order.
Justice Sotomayor said in her dissent that she believes the Trump Administration is simply playing a game, calling the president's efforts "gamesmanship."
The public recognizes the real challenges we, as a nation, are facing. Sadly, the Democrats' worldview is through the make-believe lenses of "gamesmanship."
Why is this such a big deal?
Joy Pullmann writes, "Nearly One-Quarter Of U.S. Public School Enrollment Could Be Anchor Babies."
There are many ways in which other countries have been taking great advantage of America through the "birthright citizenship" issue. This is why the president told voters he would address the issue if elected.
Pullmann says, "Returning noncitizen children and noncitizen parents to their countries could save taxpayers hundreds of billions, especially in state budgets."
She says, "A few simple calculations indicate that as much as one-quarter of U.S. public school enrollment could be anchor babies, meaning children with at least one parent illegally present in the United States. This alone amounts to at least $145.6 billion in public resources diverted from U.S. citizens every year."
"Here’s the math," she says, "In April, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimated that 17 percent of school-age children, or nine million kids, in the United States are children of at least one illegal alien. The New York Times has reported on the estimate. Some of these children are also foreign citizens, while some were born in the United States. Under a longstanding court misinterpretation, being born in the United States currently confers U.S. citizenship. Almost no other developed countries confer citizenship solely by birth location."
Nine million anchor babies times $16,280 each is $145.6 billion. Per year. Again, this is probably a lowball figure, for several reasons. First, taxpayer spending per pupil is higher today than in 2020, given the vast “Covid” money shoveled out and the resulting inflation pressuring legislatures to raise education spending for “teachers’ salaries” since then.
Second, the illegal immigrant population disproportionately hides in higher-spending blue states such as California, Illinois, and New York. New York taxpayers will shell out approximately $35,012 per student in the coming school year. In 2023, California public schools spent nearly $19,000 per student per year. In 2024, Illinois schools spent nearly $24,000 per student. This is another reason U.S. taxpayer spending on students who shouldn’t be in the United States is likely far higher than our $145.6 billion per year estimate.
Pullmann says, "Every dollar spent on a child who is rightly another country’s responsibility is a dollar not available for an American citizen. Further, this figure extended just seven years — about half of a child’s K-12 experience — totals $1 trillion. That’s half the current federal deficit."
And then there's this:
Follow the money
The amount of taxpayer money siphoned away by decades of unenforced immigration laws is truly mind-boggling. These anchor babies, their parents, and tens of millions of other migrants they’ve brought in via chain migration would not be inside the United States if those laws had been enforced. They are all benefiting from defrauding Americans.
There are huge political implications, too. In a time of declining enrollment due to America’s fertility crisis, these numbers also help explain why many public schools are promising to hide illegal aliens and anchor babies from federal law enforcement. These kids are one-fifth to one-quarter of public school revenue, and therefore inflate the schooling patronage and benefits system that massively bolsters the Democrat Party.
Pullmann concludes with this:
Money is not just numbers on a spreadsheet. Money represents a person’s lifeblood, because to earn money, one must work, and work takes time and energy. Time is a finite resource. We can never get it back after we use it on some endeavor such as working to pay our taxes, and after that, put food on the table for ourselves and our kids. It’s gone forever.
She continues, "This means every dollar governments take from citizens equals the government taking away a portion of our lives. By not enforcing immigration laws, our governments have been essentially enslaving us against our consent. This is not only helping bankrupt our country and impoverishing everyone who lives here, it’s selfish, stupid, evil, and un-American."
Takeaway
On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed an order addressing the misunderstanding and abuse of birthright citizenship.
"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:"
Section 1. Purpose. The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift. The Fourteenth Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” That provision rightly repudiated the Supreme Court of the United States’s shameful decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), which misinterpreted the Constitution as permanently excluding people of African descent from eligibility for United States citizenship solely based on their race.
But the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Consistent with this understanding, Congress has further specified through legislation that “a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, 8 U.S.C. 1401, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text.
It is the policy of the United States that no department or agency of the United States government shall issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship, to persons: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Prayerful.
