The U.S. Supreme Court is currently weighing President Donald Trump’s controversial executive order seeking to restrict birthright citizenship. In the hearing held in Washington D.C., Solicitor General D. John Sauer defended the administration, while American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Cecillia Wang challenged the order.
Sauer framed the administration’s stance as a necessary correction to long-standing legal interpretations. “Unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations,” Sauer told the court. “It demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.”
READ: Trump attends Supreme Court arguments on birthright citizenship (April 1, 2026)
Sauer has been one of the Trump administration’s most important legal strategists since the president took office. He has argued major cases tied to executive power, immigration, and federal authority. Previously, he represented Trump in the high-stakes Trump v. United States case, which resulted in a landmark ruling granting presidents broad immunity for actions within official duties.
Earlier Sauer served as Solicitor General of Missouri from 2017 to 2023, where he was involved in several politically charged legal efforts. He had notably signed onto a multistate legal challenge seeking to overturn the 2020 U.S. presidential election results.
The executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship would strip citizenship from U.S.-born children of parents “in the United States illegally or temporarily.” Lower courts have unanimously blocked the policy, invoking the century-old precedent Wong Kim Ark, which held that virtually all U.S.-born children are citizens.
The 14th Amendment guarantees that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” Historically, this was intended to secure citizenship for former slaves, but the text has been read broadly. Trump’s order challenges that interpretation. His administration argues that the clause excludes children of noncitizens and that unfettered jus soli is an outlier globally.
READ: Trump’s birthright citizenship order on hold, but rollout plan moves forward (
Opponents counter that existing law and precedent mandate citizenship for essentially all born here. They note that about 250,000 U.S.-born infants each year would lose citizenship under the order. ACLU’s Wang urged the justices not to let the president “radically reinterpret the definition of American citizenship.”
Several advocacy groups have come out to oppose the Trump administration’s stance on the matter. Most recently, South Asian American Justice Collaborative (SAAJCO) joined hundreds of community members and advocates outside the Supreme Court as justices heard arguments as part of a case on birthright citizenship. SAAJCO representatives called the moment “fundamental,” and that the case could have far-reaching consequences for immigrant communities.