More than a century ago, the US Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark was a US citizen. That 1898 case, in which the government tried to block Wong from returning to his country of birth after a visit to China, recognized that the 14th Amendment guaranteed citizenship to anyone born on US soil. Now, Wong's great-grandson, 76-year-old Norman Wong, fears that precedent is about to tumble, per Reuters. On Wednesday, justices will hear arguments related to President Trump's now-blocked executive order denying automatic citizenship to children born in the US if neither parent is a citizen or green-card holder.
The administration argues the 14th Amendment has been misread for generations and shouldn't cover the US-born children of undocumented or temporary visitors, citing concerns about illegal immigration and "birth tourism." Legal scholars largely say precedent—especially Wong Kim Ark's case—cuts the other way, and warn a ruling for Trump could affect up to 250,000 babies a year and cast doubt on the status of millions more.
The ACLU, whose lawsuit challenging the order was brought on behalf of families in New Hampshire, calls the order unconstitutional. "At a fundamental level, this case is about an attempt to strip citizenship from the children of immigrants who have always been citizens of the US," ACLU lawyer Cody Wofsy tells NBC News. Wong calls it a rerun. "It was settled 128 years ago. We're just revisiting it," he tells Reuters. The Trump administration says it isn't challenging that earlier case, but its argument—that anyone born to parents with an "allegiance to anybody else" doesn't qualify for citizenship—"directly contravenes" it, UC Berkeley law professor Amanda L. Tyler writes at the Atlantic.
,
uBlock 
,
and
Ghostery 
)
