President Donald Trump’s attorney, John Sauer, has officially wrapped up his opening arguments on a case before the Supreme Court concerning the issue of birthright citizenship, taking an opportunity to also school Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in the process. During the argument, Jackson attempted to catch Sauer in a trap by presenting him with an emotion-driven hospital-birth scenario involving illegal aliens.
“Are we bringing pregnant women in for depositions?” Jackson asked Trump’s attorney. Sauer shut that down by replying, “No. The executive order depends on lawful status. If a baby is born, a birth certificate is issued, and the system checks immigration status through existing databases.” Jackson wasn’t about to give up so easily, asking a second time if parents would get an opportunity to prove they intended to stay in the U.S.
Again, Sauer was having none of it. He answered that if someone really believes they were denied wrongly, there are means of challenging the decision, but pointed out that such situations would be rare. “The opposite is true. Their opportunity to dispute if they think they were wrongly denied, which only happens in a tiny minority of cases after this, practically addresses — ”
Jackson interjected and says, ” — after the fact, after the baby has been denied citizenship, then we can go through the process that way.” Sauer replies, “I mean, I’m summarizing because I’m not an expert on computers, but this computer program that currently automatically generates a Social Security number. SSA says, look, a social security number.”
“Non-citizens can have them if they have work authorization, so there’s proof of citizenship, we’ll give you a social security number, provided that the system automatically checks the immigration to ask their parents, which is what their robust database is for and then appears no different to the vast majority of birthing parents,” he concludes.
In other words, as explained by a user on social media platform X, “The system already verifies the parents’ status automatically, using robust databases, and for the overwhelming majority of parents, the process would look no different than it does now.” The comment section was largely in favor of ending birthright citizenship.
“If a parent isn’t in the USA with legal paperwork that is designed around intentions of staying, there should be no citizenship granted,” one user wrote. Another said, “I believe that if you have crossed into the country legally and obtained a green card or have a valid passport with appropriate stampings, when you go to deliver that baby, that it can be given US citizenship. If you’re here illegally, you don’t get that, you get deported.”
"*" indicates required fields
Another person expressed their support for ending birthright citizenship, explaining, “Yes. Use common sense . End birthright citizenship as interpreted now. Birthright citizenship should only apply to those with at least one parent who is a legal citizen!” Another slammed Justice Jackson’s ignorance on the issue, writing, “She is stupid as stupid gets – she should never have been nominated to the Supreme Court. She is an embarrassment.”
Featured Image: screenshot from embedded video