Opinions on Supreme Court’s Recent Rulings
Emily Bazelon and David French share insights on the Supreme Court’s final decisions. They address birthright citizenship and the Federal Reserve’s independence, both significant legal matters.
Relief and Concerns
Emily Bazelon feels both relief and concern. The court’s decision in Trump v. Barbara affirms that birthright citizenship remains intact. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a strong opinion supporting citizenship for those born in the U.S., excluding narrow exceptions like children of diplomats or hostile forces. This judgment counters President Trump’s prior executive order challenging this notion.
David French highlights his relief yet notes worries about ongoing debates. He fears the decision’s narrow majority might prompt a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees, reminiscent of Roe v. Wade.
The Value of Birthright Citizenship
Emily emphasizes the benefits of birthright citizenship. It fosters social mobility and integration among immigrants. The unanimous upholding of this principle illustrates its importance in American society. Yet, the closeness of the decision surprised her. She expected a stronger consensus, doubting that only Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and three liberals would robustly defend it.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred based on a 1940 federal statute, a foundation susceptible to congressional changes.
Judicial Division
The divide among justices reflects potential anger from the MAGA movement. Justice Samuel Alito deemed the decision a “serious mistake,” reflecting contentious issues surrounding birthright citizenship and its implications for immigration policies.