Justice Coney Barrett put Trump administration 'in a corner' in hearing: legal expert
President Donald Trump's administration appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday for oral arguments about the birthright citizenship executive order.
On his first day in office, Trump signed an order that would bar citizenship to anyone born to a mother who was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident.
MSNBC legal analyst Catherine A. Christian, who previously served in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, brought up an exchange between Justice Amy Coney Barrett and U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer.
The debate was over the government's idea that there was no need for a nationwide injunction while the case worked through the courts. The justices questioned if it would mean every child denied birthright citizenship must sue in court to obtain it.
ALSO READ: Revealed: Far-right pressuring Johnson to join Trump in new attack
The exchange began when Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued that the case would turn the justice system into a "catch me if you can regime." So, every child must find a lawyer in this hypothetical world without the existing injunction.
MSNBC host Ana Cabrera asked: "Are we talking about a system of justice that works for everyone here?"
"Justice Jackson was correct," Christian began. "And to quote the New Jersey solicitor general — he keeps repeating it — 'you're going to have citizenship that turns on and off as you cross state lines.' And we know that most people cannot afford the best lawyers, and particularly, as you said, immigrants who don't even know that they have an option of seeking help."
She explained that it was a key phrase being used by the New Jersey general, where he alleged the law would change, "as you cross state lines if you don't have the universal injunction" in place.
"I think Justice Barrett sort of put the U.S. Solicitor General in a corner because he would not really acknowledge that if the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, that's New York, Vermont, Connecticut, issued a decision that the Trump administration didn't like, would they follow it? He could not definitively state that he would. And that may give pause to other justices who might say, you know what? I was going to rule this way, but maybe I won't."
See the clip below or at the link here.
Leave a Comment
Related Post