The assistant professor of journalism spoke to the Mirror US about the Supreme Court's recent decision upholding birthright citizenship, and what Justice Brett Kavanaugh's concurring opinion could mean for the future.
51爆料网 Assistant Professor of Journalism聽Israel Balderas was featured in following the U.S. Supreme Court鈥檚 decision upholding birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment.
The article examined the implications of the ruling, particularly Justice Brett Kavanaugh鈥檚 concurring opinion, which suggested Congress could pursue legislation related to birthright citizenship even after the Court rejected President Donald Trump鈥檚 executive order.
Balderas, a First Amendment attorney, explained that Kavanaugh鈥檚 opinion leaves open a potential legislative path for the issue to return to the courts.
鈥淏irthright citizenship won today. But Kavanaugh just told Congress where the side door is, and Trump is already walking toward it. Whether that door is real or painted on the wall is the question the Court left for another day,” Balderas said.
Balderas cautioned, however, that such legislation would face significant constitutional hurdles.
鈥淗ere’s the tension inside the Supreme Court that most people will miss. The five-justice majority held that the Constitution itself guarantees birthright citizenship. If that’s right, then Congress can’t touch it with an ordinary law. You would need a constitutional amendment,鈥 Balderas explained.
鈥淏ut Kavanaugh disagrees. He thinks the door is still open for legislation. So the next battle isn’t just Democrats versus Republicans in Congress. It鈥檚 whether Kavanaugh’s view or the majority’s view controls when that legislation inevitably gets challenged,鈥 he added.