Amy Coney Barrett destroyed the case against birthright citizenship.

Key Points:

• During Wednesday’s Supreme Court arguments, a majority of justices expressed skepticism toward President Trump's executive order aiming to deny birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. to many immigrants, signaling a likely loss for the administration.
• Justice Amy Coney Barrett challenged the government's argument that birthright citizenship depends on the parents' "domicile" or "allegiance" to a foreign power, highlighting inconsistencies with the 14th Amendment’s original intent to protect the citizenship of formerly enslaved people.
• Barrett emphasized the principle of jus soli (citizenship by birthplace) over jus sanguinis (citizenship by descent), arguing that complicating citizenship with domicile requirements would undermine the 14th Amendment's purpose and create legal confusion.
• The ACLU’s Cecillia Wang argued that exceptions to birthright citizenship are fixed and cannot be expanded by Congress, but Barrett pressed for a clearer legal basis for this position, expressing skepticism over the policy rationale alone.
• Legal experts predict the Court will likely rule 7–2 against Trump’s position, with Barrett aligning with the majority in rejecting the administration’s attempt to limit birthright citizenship.