51吃瓜网

WASHINGTON (AP) 鈥� The Supreme Court is hearing its first set of Trump-related arguments in the second Trump presidency. The case stems from the executive order President Donald Trump issued on his first day in office that would deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily. The executive order marks a major change to the provision of the 14th Amendment that grants citizenship to people born in the United States, with just a couple of exceptions.

Immigrants, rights groups and states sued almost immediately to challenge the executive order. Federal judges have uniformly cast doubt on Trump鈥檚 reading of the Citizenship Clause. Three judges have blocked the order from taking effect anywhere in the U.S., including U.S. District Judge John Coughenour. 鈥淚鈥檝e been on the bench for over four decades. I can鈥檛 remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,鈥� Coughenour said at a hearing in his Seattle courtroom.

The Supreme Court is taking up emergency appeals filed by the Trump administration asking to be able to enforce the executive order in most of the country, at least while lawsuits over the order proceed. The constitutionality of the order is not before the court just yet. Instead, the justices are looking at potentially limiting the authority of individual judges to issue rulings that apply throughout the United States. These are known as nationwide, or universal, injunctions.

Trump presses for restrictions ahead of arguments

President Donald Trump is weighing in ahead of arguments in the birthright citizenship case today.

Trump says in an online post that granting citizenship to people born here, long seen as a constitutional promise, makes the country look 鈥淪TUPID鈥� and like 鈥淪UCKERS.鈥� He incorrectly asserted the U.S. is the only country in the world with birthright citizenship. While not every country grants it, about 30 other countries do, including Canada.

His executive order at the heart of today鈥檚 case aims to end birthright citizenship for children born to people in the U.S. illegally, something many legal scholars say would require amending the Constitution.

Three lawyers will present arguments to the court

Solicitor General D. John Sauer is representing the Trump administration in urging the court to allow Trump鈥檚 restrictions on birthright citizenship to take effect in at least 27 states. New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum is arguing on behalf of the states that say they鈥檒l lose millions of dollars in health and other benefits available to U.S. children and also have to overhaul identification systems since birth certificates will no longer serve as proof of citizenship. Kelsi Corkran is representing pregnant women and immigrant rights groups that say chaos will result if Trump鈥檚 order takes effect anywhere.

The justices will take the bench at 10 o鈥檆lock Eastern time, but the livestream won鈥檛 begin immediately. The court will issue at least one opinion before hearing arguments, so it could be 10 minutes before the Chief Justice John Roberts invites Solicitor General D. John Sauer to begin.

The livestream will be available on the court鈥檚 website, , or C-SPAN. C-SPAN asked Roberts to allow cameras to carry the case live, but he did not respond to the request, C-SPAN said. The Supreme Court has never allowed cameras in the courtroom.

A decision should come relatively soon. The Supreme Court typically rules in all its argued cases by the end of June and this one shouldn鈥檛 be any different. If anything, an order from the court might come quickly because the legal issue before the justices is not whether Trump鈥檚 birthright citizenship restrictions are constitutional, but whether to grant the administration鈥檚 emergency appeals to narrow lower court orders against it while lawsuits proceed.

___