SCOTUS upholds – The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, rejecting President Trump’s push to narrow automatic citizenship for babies born on U.S. soil. In Colorado, major primary upsets reshaped the path to November elections, including a Democratic socialist’s win an
For millions of families, citizenship has never been a question of paperwork—it has been something you inherit simply by being born on U.S. soil. But in Washington, that promise became the subject of the Supreme Court’s most consequential fight of the term.
On the day the court released its final rulings. the Supreme Court upheld the long-established right to automatic American citizenship for children born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority and traced birthright citizenship back to the nation’s founding. Roberts said that just as colonists demanded “the rights of Englishmen” more than 250 years ago. Congress amended the Constitution after the Civil War to ensure automatic citizenship for any child born on U.S. soil.
The decision passed 6-to-3. Five justices joined Roberts’ majority opinion. Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he would have struck down President Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship based on a 1952 law. but he left open the possibility that Congress could put limits on babies born to people who are in the U.S. illegally or on temporary visas. Justice Clarence Thomas authored the lead dissent—a 91-page document that agreed with Trump’s assertion that the 14th Amendment only applies to former slaves and their descendants.
The court also issued other decisions on its last day of the term. The justices ruled that states may ban transgender girls from participating in sports at publicly funded schools. The court also loosened campaign finance restrictions by striking down limits on how much political parties may spend on candidates.
While Washington wrestled with constitutional lines, voters in Colorado were drawing their own. The state’s primary elections on Tuesday produced several upsets that will matter in the fight over control of Congress this fall.
A Democratic senator lost his bid for governor. Progressive candidate Manny Rutinel advanced to the November showdown for a House seat currently held by a Republican. That matchup—between two Latino candidates—could play a crucial role in determining whether Democrats gain control of the chamber in the midterm elections.
In Denver’s political battle inside Colorado’s 1st Congressional District. voters selected 29-year-old Democratic socialist Melat Kiros as the Democratic nominee over longtime incumbent Rep. Diana DeGette. Kiros’ win continued momentum for the Democratic Socialists of America. Last week, DSA-backed candidates won two New York primaries and several state assembly races. They also advanced to the November mayoral elections in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.
Colorado’s electorate didn’t just choose a candidate—it chose a style of politics. Kiros’ alignment as a democratic socialist played a significant role in attracting younger voters who are pushing for more progressive policies. including Medicare for all and an end to all aid to Israel. according to Colorado Public Radio’s Caitlyn Kim. Kim also spoke with voters who said they want a candidate who will bring fresh ideas to Congress.
Republicans. already preparing their message for the general election. used Kiros’ victory to argue that Democrats in the state have moved too far to the left. “Anti-Washington” was a key theme of the evening, Kim said, and it may have helped sink long-term politician Sen. Michael Bennet’s campaign for governor. Bennet has been in the Senate since 2009. and voters questioned his accomplishments—and. more pointedly. what he had done to fight Trump.
The same country where the Supreme Court drew a line around citizenship rights on constitutional grounds now finds itself sorting out power through primaries—one ballot at a time. In both arenas. the message from voters and the message from judges collided: the question is who gets to define the rules. and how quickly those rules can be changed.
Supreme Court birthright citizenship 14th Amendment John Roberts Brett Kavanaugh Clarence Thomas Colorado primaries Melat Kiros Diana DeGette Manny Rutinel Michael Bennet transgender sports campaign finance
So basically your baby gets citizenship no matter what. Wild.
I don’t even get why this was controversial, like people act shocked that being born here matters. Also the transgender sports thing happening same day feels like SCOTUS just hates normal parents.
Wait so Roberts said it goes back to the founding, but doesn’t that also mean Congress can just change it later? Like if they “could put limits” then it’s not really settled, right? I’m confused but I’m still mad.
Colorado “primary upsets” sounds like they’re trying to distract from the fact they let citizenship be automatic. Next thing you know they’ll say 1952 law doesn’t matter but then use it anyway. And the campaign finance ruling too? So rich parties can spend more, but regular folks can’t even get healthcare. The whole thing is rigged, just different flavors.