If you are born in the United States, you are an American. That idea has felt so obvious that most of us have never questioned it — until now.
President Donald Trump issued an executive order in January last year ending birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to undocumented parents or on temporary visas. This is a fundamental change to how the 14th Amendment has been interpreted since its conception that immediately drew legal scrutiny.
As the Supreme Court heard arguments for the case against Trump’s order on April 1, liberal and conservative justices raised tough questions about dismantling the way citizenship has been understood in the United States and in the Constitution for more than a century.
Our Constitution should not be up for debate.
The 14th Amendment is not vague. It does not invite interpretation based on political convenience. It states clearly that all people born on U.S. soil are citizens. This fact has survived wars, 28 different administrations and ever-changing social norms.
There is something deeply unsettling about how casually Trump’s proposal can enter the national conversation. Not because political ideas should go undebated, but because this is simply not policy. Trump’s order is unconstitutional, and when an administration attempts to bypass or reinterpret it through executive action, it is obvious overreach.
Many presidents have acted unconstitutionally — Woodrow Wilson by suppressing free speech, Richard Nixon in the Watergate scandal and even George W. Bush by expanding surveillance in ways that raised serious legal concerns.
Yet none of these presidents attempted to directly override or reinterpret a clear, identity-defining constitutional guarantee in the way that ending birthright citizenship would challenge the 14th Amendment.
If a clearly established constitutional right can be challenged in this way, what stops other rights from being treated the same? Will the Constitution stop functioning as a foundation and start becoming a suggestion? That is the direction we are headed if the Trump Administration continues its repeated abuses of power.
For the New Orleans community, Trump’s order has direct implications.
New Orleans is a city defined by its wide range of identities. It is shaped by migration, culture and the blending of backgrounds and histories. The idea that someone could be born here and still be denied belonging runs against what this city represents. It turns identity and affiliation into something conditional — something that can be granted or withheld depending on who is in power.
The Supreme Court’s skepticism is a start against this unconstitutional move, but it should not be the only line of defense. Trump’s attempts to degrade the Constitution are not just controversial — they are unacceptable.
As voters, we cannot allow this violence against America’s founding principles to continue and must elect candidates who will uphold the Constitution and the values of inclusion, diversity and opportunity this country was founded on.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on the birthright citizenship case by late June or early July 2026.