Texas Lawmakers on Opposite Sides as Supreme Court Weighs Birthright Citizenship

Congressman Greg Casar (D-TX) sharply criticized President Donald Trump's executive order targeting birthright citizenship following Supreme Court arguments on Wednesday, calling it an unconstitutional attempt to erase rights Americans have held for over 150 years.

Rep. Casar took to X to clarify his position, writing that when someone is born in America, they are "an American."

He added that Trump is trying to end this basic constitutional right, which was won at the end of the Civil War, and vowed, "We won’t let Trump take our rights backward to 1865."

The executive order at the center of the dispute seeks to redefine who qualifies for automatic citizenship at birth, specifically targeting children born to undocumented immigrants and certain temporary visitors.

The Trump administration has argued the change is necessary to reduce illegal immigration, while critics contend it flies in the face of settled constitutional law.

The Prolonged Session

Wednesday's Supreme Court session lasted over two hours and gave little indication that the justices were ready to side with the White House.

Several members of the court's conservative majority raised pointed questions about the administration's legal reasoning, and Chief Justice John Roberts openly questioned how the government's argument could apply to such a broad group of people.

The proceedings were notable for Trump's rare in-person attendance as the only president to ever attend a Supreme Court hearing, a reflection of how consequential the administration considers the case.

The whole legal fight comes down to the 14th Amendment, specifically, how one phrase in it should be read.

Justices across the ideological spectrum pushed lawyers to clarify their positions, and legal analysts think the court may end up settling the case on narrower technical grounds rather than making a broad constitutional statement.

Texas Pushback

Not everyone sees the administration's position as a legal stretch. Congressman Brandon Gill (R-TX) argues that constitutional and legal precedent already support limits on birthright citizenship.

He points out that not all children born on American soil have historically been granted automatic citizenship, citing the children of foreign diplomats, members of tribes maintaining sovereign relations, and children of invading armies as long-standing exceptions.

For the Texas Republican, the key lies in a specific clause of the 14th Amendment: "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

"That means that not only are you subject to our laws, but you have complete and total allegiance to the United States," Gill said, an allegiance he argues does not extend to those who entered the country illegally or their children.

Democrats Argument

However, for Casar and other Democratic lawmakers who have rallied against the order, the stakes extend well beyond immigration policy.

They argue that allowing any president to reinterpret birthright citizenship through executive action alone would set a dangerous precedent with consequences far beyond this administration.

A ruling is expected before the court's summer recess.