Fourteenth Amendment

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment in Trump v. Barbara, rejecting arguments that it enables exploitation. The decision emphasized historical intent, while dissenting justices raised concerns about modern implications. The article highlights the economic and societal contributions of immigrant descendants, including their roles in business, government, and the military.

Attorney General Jeff Jackson states his office will continue defending the Fourteenth Amendment after the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. CASA. Jackson joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general to protect birthright citizenship protections, though the Supreme Court sent the case back to a lower court for further proceedings.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that children born in the U.S. are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment regardless of their parents' immigration status, rejecting an executive order by President Donald Trump. The decision highlighted divisions among justices, with Chief Justice John Roberts and others forming the majority, while Clarence Thomas and others dissented, arguing citizenship should depend on parental allegiance to the U.S.

Norman Wong, great-grandson of Wong Kim Ark, praised the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision upholding birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment, rejecting President Donald Trump's executive order restricting citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. The ruling reaffirmed the 1898 precedent established by Wong Kim Ark's case, which secured U.S. citizenship for those born domestically regardless of parental status.

The great-grandson of Wong Kim Ark, Norman Wong, praised the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision upholding birthright citizenship, rejecting President Trump's executive order. The ruling reaffirmed the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of citizenship for anyone born in the U.S., with Chief Justice John Roberts leading the majority. Trump criticized the decision, while dissenting justices argued the amendment was misinterpreted.

The Supreme Court struck down an executive order ending birthright citizenship for children of noncitizens, with a vote closer than expected (6-3 or 5-4). The decision highlighted Justice Brett Kavanaugh's unexpected alignment with liberal justices on the issue, despite his conservative leanings in other aspects of the case.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship in a 6-3 decision, rejecting President Donald Trump's executive order to end the practice. Immigrant communities and legal advocates in New York City expressed cautious relief, though concerns remain about ongoing immigration enforcement and recent rulings affecting Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that children born in the U.S. are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment regardless of their parents' immigration status. The decision rejected President Donald Trump's executive order denying citizenship to children of undocumented or temporary residents, highlighting divisions among justices, including contrasting views between Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Clarence Thomas.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that children born in the U.S. are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment, regardless of their parents' legal status. The decision highlights significant disagreements among the justices.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that children born in the U.S. are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment regardless of parents' immigration status, rejecting President Donald Trump's executive order. The decision highlighted divisions among justices, including differing views between Black justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Clarence Thomas' dissent arguing citizenship requires deeper parental ties to the U.S.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that children born in the U.S. are citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment regardless of their parents' immigration status, rejecting an executive order by President Donald Trump. The decision highlighted divisions among justices, including differing views between two Black justices and sharp disagreements over historical interpretations of the Citizenship Clause.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to Cook County’s assault weapons ban, which prohibits possession of firearms like AR-15s. The case, consolidated with a similar challenge from Connecticut, will determine whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to own such rifles. The decision follows the 2022 Bruen ruling, which established a framework for evaluating gun laws based on historical tradition of firearm regulation.

The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship in a 6-3 decision, rejecting President Trump's executive order that sought to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders. The ruling cited the Fourteenth Amendment and the 1898 Wong Kim Ark case, which established birthright citizenship for all children born in the U.S. except for those of foreign diplomats.

On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision, ruling state bans violated the Fourteenth Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses. The article also notes other historical events occurring on June 26, including the UN charter signing in 1945 and the Berlin Airlift beginning in 1948.

The Fourteenth Amendment's citizenship clause, established in 1868, grants citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction. President Trump's 2025 executive order challenged this by proposing to deny citizenship to children born to parents lacking legal status or temporary visitors, prompting a Supreme Court case that could redefine birthright citizenship. The Court will decide if the Constitution's wording applies universally, excluding rare exceptions like children of foreign dignitaries.

Memphis-Shelby County Schools, along with the Shelby County Commission and nine board members, filed a federal lawsuit against Tennessee officials to block a state takeover law that transfers control from the local school board to a Republican-appointed oversight board. The lawsuit claims the law violates the Fourteenth Amendment and Tennessee Constitution by dismantling local governance and stripping budget approval authority from county government.

The article discusses the Supreme Court case Callais v. Louisiana, which impacted vote-dilution claims under the Voting Rights Act and raised questions about whether a new standard for racial gerrymandering under the Fourteenth Amendment was established. The decision, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, left uncertainty about whether intentional racial intent or mere predominance of race in redistricting constitutes a constitutional violation.

A federal judge blocked Indiana from enforcing a law that prohibits college-issued student IDs from being used for voting, ruling the measure likely violates constitutional rights. The injunction was granted against Senate Bill 10, which removed student IDs from Indiana’s acceptable voter ID list, despite their prior acceptance for nearly two decades.

A federal judge blocked Indiana's law banning student IDs for voting, ruling it likely violates constitutional rights. The law, Senate Bill 10, removed student IDs from acceptable voter IDs despite their 20-year acceptance if meeting specific criteria. Indiana's attorney general plans to appeal, citing election security concerns.