JUANA SUMMERS, HOST:
Today, the Supreme Court heard arguments on birthright citizenship, the constitutional tenet that virtually every baby born in the U.S., regardless of their parents' status, is automatically granted citizenship. The Trump administration argues that should change.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
D JOHN SAUER: The citizenship clause was adopted just after the Civil War to grant citizenship to the newly freed slaves and their children, whose allegiance to the United States had been established by generations of domicile here. It did not grant citizenship to the children of temporary visitors or illegal aliens, who have no such allegiance.
SCOTT DETROW, HOST:
Representing the government, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued what the political moment of today should change the interpretation of what is written clearly in the 14th Amendment. Many justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, seemed skeptical.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
SAUER: We're in a new world now, as Justice Alito pointed out, to where 8 billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who's a U.S. citizen.
JOHN ROBERTS: Well, it's a new world. This is the same Constitution.
DETROW: Arguing against the government was Cecillia Wang, the national legal director for the ACLU. She said the Trump administration's interpretation would upend the Constitution and millions of lives.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
CECILLIA WANG: Swathes of American laws would be rendered senseless. Thousands of American babies will immediately lose their citizenship. And if you credit the government's theory, the citizenship of millions of Americans - past, present and future - could be called into question.
SUMMERS: The case comes at a critical time for President Trump, as public opinion continues to shift against him, particularly on his handling of immigration. NPR senior national political correspondent Mara Liasson is here with more. Hi.
MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: Hi there.
SUMMERS: So, Mara, President Trump was at the Supreme Court in person today for these arguments. And I'll just say, that's not just uncommon. No president has ever sat in for arguments at the court. Tell us why this particular issue is so important to Trump.
LIASSON: There's no issue that's more central to Donald Trump's politics than immigration, not even tariffs. He's talked about denaturalizing people who are citizens. He's leading a mass deportation campaign. And this case in front of the Supreme Court today is at the heart of his view on immigration because it's about who is an American citizen and who gets to decide who those citizens are.
Now, birthright citizenship itself as an issue has not really entered the political debate the way ICE has or mass deportations have. People are not debating this on cable TV. There are activists on the left and the right who understand this issue and care a lot about it. But as an example of this, the first thing that Donald Trump posted online after leaving the court today was about immigration, but not about birthright citizenship. He posted his kind of typical screed about how tens of millions of illegal immigrants, including rapists and murderers, had been let into the country by Democrats.
SUMMERS: Interesting. I wonder, what are the real-world ramifications for Trump?
LIASSON: Well, there are a lot of them, especially given that his immigration policies right now are net negative. They used to be some of his biggest positives. People like the idea of a secure border and deporting criminals, but they haven't been popular about - haven't been happy about how he went about mass deportation.
So his support among voters on immigration has dropped. His support among Latino voters has plummeted largely because of this issue. So if the justices rule in his favor and say citizenship is not given to every baby born in the U.S., there will be a lot of happiness on the right, energy, motivation - and also on the left, who are against his immigration policies. We don't have really good polling on that yet.
SUMMERS: What about if the justices rule against President Trump?
LIASSON: Well, that's the big question because today the justices seemed pretty skeptical of the administration's arguments. If he loses this case, he can attack the court. He can go to Congress to ask them to pass legislation codifying his executive order. If he does that, birthright citizenship will land smack in the middle of the political debate because, presumably, the courts are going to rule on this before the midterm elections. And the president has been posting about the possibility of losing in the Supreme Court, almost as if he expects to lose. He said, quote, the court "will find a way to come to the wrong conclusion."
SUMMERS: We've seen the president's public support falling on a number of issues aside from immigration. I'm thinking about the economy and foreign policy, for example. How unusual is this political moment for the president?
LIASSON: I think it's unusual. He seems more on the defensive than he usually is, angrier than he usually is. The Iran war is unpopular. He's going to be talking about that tonight on TV. He has bad numbers on the economy. And his political motive usually is domination. That's part of why he showed up in person today to stare down the judges that he's been attacking online. So he's on the defensive. That's an unusual place for him. He wants to be on offense, which is a much more comfortable place. And he's trying to flip the script before the November elections.
SUMMERS: NPR senior national political correspondent Mara Liasson. Thanks, as always.
LIASSON: You're welcome. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
