Immigrants scramble for clarity after US birthright ruling

The US Supreme Court’s ruling tied to birthright citizenship prompted confusion and phone calls to lawyers as people who could be affected tried to process a convoluted legal decision with major humanitarian implications.

The court’s conservative majority on Friday granted President Donald Trump his request to curb federal judges’ power but did not decide the legality of his bid to restrict birthright citizenship.

That outcome has raised more questions than answers about a right long understood to be guaranteed under the US Constitution: that anyone born in the US is considered a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents’ legal status.

Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on Friday morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried.

“There are not many specifics,” said Lorena. “I don’t understand it well.” She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality.

“I don’t know if I can give her mine,” she said. “I also don’t know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don’t want her to be adrift with no nationality.”

Yesterday’s decision said Trump’s policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked.

On Friday afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship.

If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating “an extremely confusing patchwork” across the country, according to a policy analyst for the Migration Policy Institute.