(CTN News) – The United States Supreme Court signaled on Thursday that it would be amenable to hearing oral arguments on countrywide injunctions in the birthright citizenship dispute.

President Trump terminated the long-standing practice of granting citizenship to individuals born in the United States to mothers who were not legally entitled to be in the country by issuing an executive order on January 20, the day after he assumed office.

Several legal concerns were raised immediately, and as a result, federal courts in the states of Washington, Massachusetts, and Maryland issued several rulings that impeded the order’s progress during its implementation.

Most people think the president can’t change the law unilaterally.

In 1868, two years after the Civil War concluded, the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution occurred. According to this amendment, every individual born within the United States of America is instantaneously eligible to become a citizen of the country.

The United States Solicitor General, D. John Sauer, contended before the court that countrywide injunctions are a novel issue that is supported by both the Democratic and Republican parties. He acted as the individual in question, representing the administration.

“This issue has been a bipartisan concern for the past five presidential administrations,” he stated in his statement to the media. During her remarks, Justice Sonia Sotomayor emphasized that the actions of President Trump are inconsistent with prior Supreme Court rulings.

“The argument is that the president is violating four established Supreme Court precedents, not just one,” she stated in an interview with reporters.

She continued to caution that the verdict’s enforcement would result in the birth of thousands of children in the United States without citizenship, and some of them may be classified as “stateless” as a result of the constraints imposed by their home countries.

According to the Supreme Court,

Justice Elena Kagan anticipates that it may be challenging to evaluate the validity of the order if the administration continues to lose challenges in lower courts and decides not to appeal to the Supreme Court.

“I suggest that if the government is always losing, no one else will appeal.” After all was said and done, they emerged victorious. It is entirely up to you to determine whether or not to raise this issue to our attention at the organization. I would never even contemplate pursuing this matter to the Supreme Court if it were in my hands.

I would never even entertain the possibility. In all honesty, I would not even consider pursuing this matter. Consequently, you continue to incur losses in the lower courts. What steps are you taking to address this issue? Kagan issued a statement.

In their “respectful” conversation, Sauer questioned the forecast’s accuracy.

Trump declared, immediately prior to the commencement of the conversation, that the actions of the United States of America are indicative of its status as a “stupid country.”

“The United States Supreme Court is currently hearing a significant case.” The developers of the Birthright Citizenship program never intended to enable an individual to acquire perpetual citizenship in the United States while on vacation.

If they had done it that way, they could have brought their family and laughed at us “suckers.” Trump has provided financial support to Truth Social.

Throughout the event, a substantial number of individuals assembled in front of the Supreme Court to demonstrate their support for the rights of immigrants. Placards conveyed the following message: “Children born in the United States are children born in the United States.”

SOURCE: AA