BALTIMORE — The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship in a 6-3 ruling Tuesday, striking down one of President Trump's first actions in office that sought to end the practice.
The court ruled the 14th Amendment is clear as it is written, delivering what legal experts are calling a rebuke of the Trump administration's efforts to reshape the country's immigration policies.
Maureen Sweeney, director of the Chacón Center for Immigrant Justice and a professor at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, said the decision provides a definitive answer on a question that had far-reaching implications, only recently posed by the Trump Administration after more than a century of established law.
Maryland law experts say birthright ruling affirms Constitution, but political debate is far from over
"This is a really important decision because it does provide a bottom line, and the bottom line is that the Constitution protects children born in the United States regardless of who their parents are," Sweeney said.
Sweeney said there's no telling what may have happened if the court had decided the other way. She believes the potential chaos that may have ensued ultimately swayed the justices.
"It would have been a huge headache from the point of view of the states, which are the ones that issue birth certificates and nobody was ever really able to explain how that would work," Sweeney said.
The most impacted by the decision are families of mixed-immigration status.
Like Sweeney, Mark Graber, a constitutional law professor at the Carey School of Law, is also carefully reviewing every detail of the ruling.
"It's 200 pages. I have to start excerpting tonight for my students and for a casebook," he explained.
When asked by WMAR-2 News' Blair Sabol whether Tuesday's ruling puts to bed the argument to end birthright citizenship, here's what he had to say:
"No more than Roe v. Wade put to bed the argument about abortion," he said.
Adding that the political fight is far from over.
"I presume Trump isn't going to say, 'Oh well, we fought the good fight. Let's go home and fight something else.' The fight will go on until people are convinced one way or the other," Graber said.
The president has already called on Congress to act towards ending birthright citizenship. Sweeney, however, is skeptical that effort will gain traction. At least, from a public opinion perspective.
"The reality is that the American people just have no appetite for that," she said.
In Focus look at recent SCOTUS rulings
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore issued a statement Tuesday saying, "This decision is a welcome relief to the immigrant communities across Maryland who have faced relentless attacks from this federal administration over the past two years. The White House does not get to pick and choose who has the right to be an American."
Citizenship status has not stopped ramped-up ICE enforcement efforts in certain cases. Dulce Diaz Consuelo Morales, a mother agents arrested late last year in Baltimore despite proof of her citizenship, including a birth certificate and immunization records, is one example. The Department of Homeland Security dropped the case in May with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing.
On Tuesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson criticized the ruling, citing the problem of so-called "birth tourism."
"It's been abused. It's one of those things that's been intended a noble and important purpose and has been thwarted," he said.
