The Supreme Court is set to review arguments today regarding President Donald Trump’s significant executive order issued on his first day in 2025, which could potentially challenge the traditional understanding of U.S. citizenship eligibility.

The executive order, not applicable retroactively, proposes denying citizenship to children of immigrants in the U.S. unlawfully or with temporary lawful presence, such as students or individuals on work visas.

Critics argue that Trump’s directive is unconstitutional and stems from biased anti-immigrant sentiments. They suggest that the administration may pursue its objectives through alternative approaches or by lobbying Congress for legislative action.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) emphasized in its legal brief that birthright citizenship is a fundamental aspect of American culture and society. ACLU lawyer Cecilia Wang expressed concerns, stating that the order could have far-reaching and unpredictable consequences.

The case is expected to pivot on interpreting five words from the 14th Amendment, legal experts suggest.

President Trump, a rare occurrence, departed the White House to attend the Supreme Court session, where he has previously criticized judges, including conservative Justices Gorsuch and Barrett, following a recent court ruling on tariffs.

The White House argues that the current birthright citizenship policy encourages illegal immigration and birth tourism, contrasting with countries like Britain and Australia that have adopted more conditional citizenship definitions.

A lower court in New Hampshire ruled that Trump’s executive order violated the 14th Amendment’s citizenship provisions. Solicitor General John Sauer defended the order, stating that it aims to prevent non-citizens from exploiting immigration laws to secure citizenship for their offspring.

The debate revolves around the interpretation of the term “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment. The administration contends that mere birth in the U.S. does not automatically confer citizenship, requiring primary allegiance and lawful domicile within the nation.

Critics fear that the executive order could lead to stricter or retroactive restrictions, potentially leaving children stateless and vulnerable to discrimination.

Legal experts anticipate a contentious Supreme Court debate, with differing views on the interpretation of citizenship eligibility under the 14th Amendment.