illuminem summarises for you the essential news of the day. Read the full piece on The Washington Post or enjoy below:
🗞️ Driving the news: The U.S. Supreme Court is deliberating whether to restrict nationwide injunctions that have blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants and foreign visitors
• The justices appeared divided, with some wary of undermining judicial authority and others questioning the legal validity of Trump’s move. A decision is expected by late June
🔭 The context: Trump issued the executive order on his return to office in January 2025, challenging the interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause, which guarantees citizenship to all born on U.S. soil
• Courts have repeatedly upheld this principle since United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
• Nationwide injunctions have increasingly been used to counteract executive orders from both parties, raising concerns about the scope of judicial power
🌍 Why it matters for the planet: While primarily a constitutional matter, this case intersects with global migration and human rights
• Revoking birthright citizenship could reshape U.S. immigration policy, potentially influencing other nations and prompting humanitarian and legal crises
• It also highlights how domestic legal changes can have cascading effects on international migration systems and protections for stateless children
⏭️ What's next: The Court will issue its ruling before the end of its term in June, which could either uphold the current injunctions, narrow them, or allow Trump’s policy to proceed in states not party to the suit
• If the injunctions are limited, the administration could begin denying citizenship in up to 28 states, prompting further lawsuits and legal fragmentation
• This outcome may reshape how executive orders are contested in court and influence future challenges to federal authority
💬 One quote: “The Constitution is not something the government can play policy games with,” — Judge John C. Coughenour, a Reagan appointee, who ruled against the executive order
📈 One stat: 22 Democratic-led states joined lawsuits challenging the birthright citizenship ban, highlighting the widespread opposition to the executive order across the country
Click for more news covering the latest on social responsibility
