Immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling tied to birthright citizenship prompted confusion and phone calls to lawyers as people who could be affected tried to process a convoluted legal decision with major humanitarian implications.
The court's conservative majority on Friday granted President Donald Trump his request to curb federal judges' power but did not decide the legality of his bid to restrict birthright citizenship.
That outcome has raised more questions than answers about a right long understood to be guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution: that anyone born in the United States is considered a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents' citizenship or legal status.
Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on Friday morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried.
"There are not many specifics," said Lorena, who like others interviewed by Reuters asked to be identified by her first name out of fear for her safety. "I don't understand it well."
She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality.
"I don't know if I can give her mine," she said. "I also don't know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality."
Trump, a Republican, issued an order after taking office in January that directed U.S. agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the U.S. who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was blocked by three separate U.S. district court judges, sending the case on a path to the Supreme Court.
The resulting decision said Trump's policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked. On Friday afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship.
If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating "an extremely confusing patchwork" across the country, according to Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute.
"Would individual doctors, individual hospitals be having to try to figure out how to determine the citizenship of babies and their parents?" she said.
The drive to restrict birthright citizenship is part of Trump's broader immigration crackdown, and he has framed automatic citizenship as a magnet for people to come to give birth.
"Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn't meant for that reason," he said during a White House press briefing on Friday.
WORRIED CALLS
Immigration advocates and lawyers in some Republican-led states said they received calls from a wide range of pregnant immigrants and their partners following the ruling.
They were grappling with how to explain it to clients who could be dramatically affected, given all the unknowns of how future litigation would play out or how the executive order would be implemented state by state.
Lynn Tramonte, director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance said she got a call on Friday from an East Asian temporary visa holder with a pregnant wife. He was anxious because Ohio is not one of the plaintiff states and wanted to know how he could protect his child's rights.
"He kept stressing that he was very interested in the rights included in the Constitution," she said.
Advocates underscored the gravity of Trump's restrictions, which would block an estimated 150,000 children born in the U.S. annually from receiving automatic citizenship.
"It really creates different classes of people in the country with different types of rights," said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a spokesperson for the immigrant rights organization United We Dream. "That is really chaotic."
Adding uncertainty, the Supreme Court ruled that members of two plaintiff groups in the litigation - CASA, an immigrant advocacy service in Maryland, and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project - would still be covered by lower court blocks on the policy. Whether someone in a state where Trump's policy could go into effect could join one of the organizations to avoid the restrictions or how state or federal officials would check for membership remained unclear.
Betsy, a U.S. citizen who recently graduated from high school in Virginia and a CASA member, said both of her parents came to the U.S. from El Salvador two decades ago and lacked legal status when she was born.
"I feel like it targets these innocent kids who haven't even been born," she said, declining to give her last name for concerns over her family's safety.
Nivida, a Honduran asylum seeker in Louisiana, is a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and recently gave birth.
She heard on Friday from a friend without legal status who is pregnant and wondersabout the situation under Louisiana's Republican governor, since the state is not one of those fighting Trump's order.
"She called me very worried and asked what's going to happen," she said. "If her child is born in Louisiana … is the baby going to be a citizen?"
(Reporting by Ted Hesson in Washington and Kristina Cooke in San Francisco; Editing by Amy Stevens and Sam Holmes)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
25 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
Even as markets rally, Trump's policymaking causes market angst
NEW YORK: As Wall Street puts April's tariff shakeout in the rear-view mirror and indexes set record highs, investors remain wary of US President Donald Trump's rapid-fire, sometimes chaotic policymaking process and see the rally as fragile. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite Index advanced past their previous highs into uncharted territory on Friday. Yet traders and investors remain wary of what may lie ahead. Trump's April 2 reciprocal tariffs on major trading partners roiled global financial markets and put the S&P 500 on the threshold of a bear market designation when it ended down 19 per cent from its Feb 19 record-high close. This week's leg up came after a US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Iran brought an end to a 12-day air battle that had sparked a jump in crude prices and raised worries of higher inflation. But a relief rally started after Trump responded to the initial tariff panic that gripped financial markets by backing away from his most draconian plans. JP Morgan Chase, in the midyear outlook published on Wednesday by its global research team, said the environment was characterised by "extreme policy uncertainty." "Nobody wants to end a week with a risk-on tilt to their portfolios," said Art Hogan, market strategist at B. Riley Wealth. Everyone is aware that just as the market feels more certain and confident, a single wildcard policy announcement could change everything," even if it does not ignite a firestorm of the kind seen in April. Part of this wariness from institutional investors may be due to the magnitude of the six per cent S&P 500 rally that followed Trump's re-election last November and culminated in the last new high posted by the index in February, said Joseph Quinlan, market strategist at Bank of America. "We were out ahead of our skis," Quinlan said. A focus on deregulation, tax cuts and corporate deals brought out the "animal spirits," he said. Then came the tariff battles. Quinlan remains upbeat on the outlook for US stocks and optimistic that a new global trade system could lead to US companies opening new markets and posting higher revenues and profits. But he said he is still cautious. "There will still be spikes of volatility around policy unknowns." Overall, measures of market volatility are now well below where they stood at the height of the tariff turmoil in April, with the CBOE VIX index now at 16.30, down from a 52.30 peak on Apr 8. UNSTABLE MARKETS "Our clients seem to have become somewhat desensitised to the headlines, but it's still an unhealthy market, with everyone aware that trading could happen based on the whims behind a bunch of" social media posts, said Jeff O'Connor, head of market structure, Americas, at Liquidnet, an institutional trading platform. Trading in the options market shows little sign of the kind of euphoria that characterised stock market rallies of the recent past. "On the institutional front, we do see a lot of hesitation in chasing the market rally," Stefano Pascale, head of US equity derivatives research at Barclays, said. Unlike past episodes of sharp market selloffs, institutional investors have largely stayed away from employing bullish call options to chase the market higher, Pascale said, referring to plain options that confer the right to buy at a specified future price and date. Bid/ask spreads on many stocks are well above levels O'Connor witnessed in late 2024, while market depth – a measure of the size and number of potential orders – remains at the lowest levels he can recall in the last 20 years. "The best way to describe the markets in the last couple of months, even as they have recovered, is to say they are unstable," said Liz Ann Sonders, market strategist at Charles Schwab. She said she is concerned that the market may be reaching "another point of complacency" akin to that seen in March. "There's a possibility that we'll be primed for another downside move," Sonders added. Mark Spindel, chief investment officer at Potomac River Capital in Washington, said he came up with the term "Snapchat presidency" to describe the whiplash effect on markets of the president's constantly changing policies on markets. "He feels more like a day trader than a long-term institutional investor," Spindel said, alluding to Trump's policy flip-flops. "One minute he's not going to negotiate, and the next he negotiates." To be sure, traders seem to view those rapid shifts in course as a positive in the current rally, signalling Trump's willingness to heed market signals. "For now, at least, stocks are willing to overlook the risks that go along with this style and lack of consistent policies, and give the administration a break as being 'market friendly'," said Steve Sosnick, market strategist at Interactive Brokers.
The Star
34 minutes ago
- The Star
Canada, Europeans and Brazil, not US, issue statement backing LGBT rights
FILE PHOTO: A person attends the annual Pride parade in Dublin, Ireland, June 24, 2023. REUTERS/Clodagh Kilcoyne/File Photo WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The foreign ministries of Canada, Australia, Brazil and a host of European countries issued a statement on Saturday celebrating LGBT rights to coincide with Pride Day. The United States, which has moved rapidly to dismantle civil rights protections since the election of President Donald Trump, was not among its signatories. The statement, whose backers also include Spain, Belgium, Colombia, Ireland and other nations, said the countries "are speaking and acting as one to champion the rights of LGBTQI people," using the abbreviation for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex people. "At a time when hate speech and hate crimes are on the rise, and in view of efforts to strip LGBTQI people of their rights, we reject all forms of violence, criminalization, stigmatization or discrimination, which constitute human rights violations," the statement said. It was not immediately clear why the United States was absent. Canadian, Australian, Brazilian, Irish and U.S. officials did not immediately return messages seeking comment on the Pride Day statement and Washington's absence from it. The U.S., once a champion of gay rights abroad, has reversed course under Trump, whose administration has rapidly dismantled longstanding civil rights protections for LGBT people and expelled transgender servicemembers from the military. Defenders of gay rights are concerned that the backsliding will embolden anti-gay movements elsewhere, especially in Africa, where it could worsen an already difficult situation for LGBT people. Trump's right-wing allies have tapped in to anti-LGBT sentiment to shore up their political support. In Hungary on Saturday, tens of thousands of protesters flouted a law passed in March by Prime Minister Viktor Orban's government that allows for the ban of Pride marches. The demonstrators swarmed Budapest with rainbow-colored flags in one of the biggest shows of opposition to the Hungarian leader. (Reporting by Raphael Satter and Ryan Jones; Editing by Humeyra Pamuk and William Mallard)
The Star
34 minutes ago
- The Star
Colombia lower house approves pension reform, again
FILE PHOTO: Colombia's President Gustavo Petro attends the signing of the labor reform made by his government, in Bogota, Colombia June 25, 2025. REUTERS/Luisa Gonzalez/File Photo BOGOTA (Reuters) -Colombia's lower house approved on Saturday, for the second time, a pension reform supported by leftist President Gustavo Petro, after the constitutional court ordered a repetition of the ballot because of procedural irregularities. The court's June decision did not rule on the bill's constitutionality but required the lower house to vote again on the version approved by the Senate, saying there was not enough debate held ahead of the first vote in June 2024. The bill was backed by 97 lawmakers on Saturday, while one voted against it. The measure was supposed to come into force in July but will not be valid until the court approves it, the court ruling said. The bill is meant to strengthen state pension fund Colpensiones by requiring those who earn less than $800 per month to save with the fund. It ensures payments for those without sufficient retirement savings, or with no savings at all. The legislation, which reduces the number of weeks women who have children must accumulate in order to be eligible for pensions, will not affect people who have already notched enough weeks to be within striking distance of retirement. It does not change Colombia's pension age, which is 62 for men and 57 for women. The government estimates that some 2.6 million older adults will benefit from the payments to those with no or insufficient pension savings. Petro's ambitious economic and social reforms have faced uphill battles in Congress, though lawmakers in June backed a labor reform similar to an original proposal backed by Petro's government which was initially rejected. (Reporting by Carlos Vargas; Writing by Luis Jaime Acosta and Julia Symmes Cobb; Editing by William Mallard)
