A divided US Supreme Court upheld the constitutional right of birthright citizenship, rejecting US President Donald Trump’s planned restrictions and invalidating a central plank of his immigration agenda, according to Bloomberg.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented. In his dissent, Thomas wrote that national citizenship was “derivative of state citizenship” and that national citizenship required domicile because state citizenship required domicile. Elizabeth Wydra, president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, discussed the decision on Balance of Power.
GEOPOLITICS | Wydra Says Domicile Isn’t a Real Argument for Citizenship After Supreme Court Birthright Ruling
2026-06-30 19:10:42
Disclaimer:
1. The information provided does not constitute investment advice. Investors should make independent decisions and bear all risks themselves.
2. The copyright of this content belongs to the original author. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not represent the stance or position of this website.
