It’s One of the Most Important Days in Modern American History - Top 3 Takeaways – May 15th, 2025 – Driven By Braman Motorcars
Takeaway #1: The Cases
A bit of hyperbole? Perhaps. Possible though? Yes. There is a chance that today is one of the most important days in modern American history. That’s due to not one, not two, but three landmark cases being consolidated in one Supreme Court hearing today. And not just any cases, but cases that could redefine birthright citizenship, the extent of executive authority and the judicial authority of lower federal courts. So yes, the festivities at the high court hold the potential to be THAT BIG of a deal today. The crux of the cases before the court day involve President Trump’s day 1 executive order: Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship which seeks to further define birthright citizenship. Under the president’s order a child born in the United States would be a legal citizen if either the mother or father were legal residents at the time of a child’s birth. The three cases consolidated into one mega hearing are these 1) Trump v. CASA, Inc., this case was brought by the left-wing Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project on behalf of five pregnant asylum seekers living in Maryland, looking to have their future children recognized as American citizens. The legal challenge was filed on January 21st, one day after President Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship for children born in this country to illegal immigrants. A Maryland District court judge not only issued an emergency ruling in favor of the plaintiffs, but also issued a nationwide injunction against President Trump’s executive order. 2) Trump v. Washington, this case was brought by the AGs of Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon, also on January 21st, arguing that the president’s order violates the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. On February 6th, a district court judge in Washington issued a nationwide injunction blocking enforcement of President Trump’s executive order which was later upheld under an emergency appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 3) Trump v. New Jersey, similar to the second case, this is a legal challenge by 18 states and the District of Columbia to President Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order filed on January 21st. A District Court judge in Massachusetts issued a nationwide preliminary injunction which was upheld on appeal by the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
Takeaway #2: The considerations
Yes, there is the obvious matter at hand regarding the birthright citizenship question that the Supreme Court will be considering today, but even then, there’s room for potential nuance within the considerations- more on those angles in a moment. What’s arguably every bit, if not even more important, than the matter that brought these legal challenges, is whether the courts that’s issued their original orders retained any legal authority to do so. The use of nation-wide injunctions by district court judges is in the crosshairs today. As has been argued by team Trump it’s absurd that a district court judge, the lowest in the federal judicial system, would have the unilateral power in the judiciary equal to that of the President of the United States. Since the earliest days of President Trump’s first administration the Left has filed a tidal wave of cases against President Trump’s agenda with cherry-picked federal court judges that have issued federal injunctions striking down his agenda. This has been true from the southern border, including construction of the Wall, to Trump’s Remain in Mexico policy during his first term – to ICE detentions and deportations independent of birthright citizenship already this term. Trump won well over half of the cases brought against him during his first term in the end (including the aforementioned), however using the courts to obstruct his orders for years is why, for example the southern border wall wasn’t completed during his first term and why over a million additional bogus asylum seekers were allowed into this country during his first four years too. There is a sense of urgency attached to the president’s agenda that is one of the paramount considerations before the court today. Yesterday was President Trump’s 114th day in office and 234 cases had been filed against his administration with only 7 that had been closed. The rampant abuse of our legal system by the Left is what’s on the agenda today.
Takeaway #3: What to look for
As is always the case during oral arguments, the line of questioning by justices, in addition to occasional commentary, will be closely watched with each of the arguments at hand. And as I referenced there’s room for nuanced responses and eventual decisions by the Supreme Court. Outcomes could include upholding President Trump’s order regarding birthright citizenship, striking it down while indicating that perhaps a law as opposed to an executive order might be more appropriate. They could rule that the judges lacked the authority to issue nationwide injunctions and that their rulings only applied to specific litigants in their cases as opposed to the whole country. The considerations are many and we won’t have the eventual ruling(s) today, however we might have a pretty good idea about whether the Supreme Court intends to make today’s consolidated hearing a procedural one, or a structural one. If it’s structural, today holds the potential to redefine the role of both the federal judiciary and citizenship as it’s persisted. That the Supreme Court is holding this hearing today – two weeks after the end of oral arguments ended in the current session – tells you that they thought what’s on the line in that court room today is too important to wait until the fall session. Stand by for news...