Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LetMyPeopleVote

(179,785 posts)
34. 'Alarm bells' ring as Trump resurrects racist arguments in major legal case: experts
Mon Mar 30, 2026, 01:33 PM
Yesterday

The 14th Amendment is clear to me and the arguments being raised by trump are weak. The authority cited by trump's DOJ is really weak.

'Alarm bells' ring as Trump resurrects racist arguments in major legal case: experts

Raw Story (@rawstory.com) 2026-03-30T14:30:15Z

https://www.rawstory.com/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-2676636588

The Trump administration is relying on legal arguments developed by Confederate officers and 19th-century xenophobes to challenge birthright citizenship in a Supreme Court case expected to be decided by summer, drawing criticism from legal scholars who say the administration is recycling deeply racist historical precedents.

The administration's Supreme Court brief cites Alexander Porter Morse, a Confederate officer and Louisiana attorney who advocated for legalized segregation in the 1896 case that established the "separate but equal" doctrine that propped up Jim Crow laws, reported the Washington Post.

"The Trump administration has tapped Morse as an authority in its push to upend long-settled law that virtually everyone born in the United States is a citizen," the Post reported. "Over a century ago, Morse was among a trio of thinkers who spearheaded a failed effort — steeped in anti-Black and anti-Chinese racism — to erase birthright citizenship. The Trump administration is reviving their arguments to make its case today, some legal scholars say."

The administration also relies on arguments from Francis Wharton, a legal scholar who wrote that Chinese immigrants were insufficiently "civilized," and George D. Collins, a San Francisco attorney whose career ended in scandal.

Lucy Salyer, a University of New Hampshire history professor, expressed concern about the administration's approach. "If you know the history and the broader context of what they were trying to achieve, it does ring alarm bells," she said.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

We do not have the "best and the brightest" on our SCOTUS. MLWR Sunday #1
Yeah. Unfortunately... GB_RN Sunday #2
They're trying to enable the crafting of arguments to back up Trump's request. ChicagoTeamster Sunday #4
I know this is simplistic but we are all birthright citizens Srkdqltr Sunday #3
Insanity. This is settled law, even written into our Constitution specifically as an Amendment. Midnight Writer Sunday #5
Excellent comment! WestMichRad Sunday #9
It makes me wonder what is Kavanaugh's real position on this issue? FakeNoose Sunday #6
Damn, that's foul cause Dan Sunday #15
Yes, those are called "anchor babies" and it has been going on for a long time FakeNoose 22 hrs ago #36
I didn't know he asked those questions. It's good that he asked them. LeftInTX Sunday #17
The Confederacy renounced their US citizenship by seceding. All of their descendants lost their birthright citizenship ChicagoTeamster Sunday #7
PLEASE, PLEASE Understand what EOs are and what they are not Bluetus Sunday #8
That is how it is SUPPOSED to work BumRushDaShow Sunday #11
We have to make it more difficult for Roberts Bluetus Sunday #14
We went through that exercise his first term BumRushDaShow Sunday #20
I am perfectly aware we don't control the GOP, the SCOTUS or the legacy media Bluetus Sunday #25
"It is crazy to just sit back and accept this. WE must do our part." BumRushDaShow Yesterday #30
Going down a rabbit hole, I also saw this: LeftInTX Sunday #19
The below is the argument they are apparently going to try to use - BumRushDaShow Sunday #21
They used that arguement last year LeftInTX Sunday #22
As long as the SCOTUS keeps refusing stays on the illegal E.O.s BumRushDaShow Sunday #24
Has the SCOTUS allowed any of the bogus EOs to stand permanently? Bluetus Sunday #26
Remember that we are ONLY just over a year into this term BumRushDaShow Yesterday #31
I'm sure the SCOTUS is all about helping Trump with his agenda Bluetus Yesterday #32
I agree with what you wrote and in particular BumRushDaShow Yesterday #33
Considering that 2700 pages is just a little more than 5 reams of papper. Bluetus Yesterday #35
I seriously doubt, Bayard Sunday #10
"Or any other white baby" .... Would Trump /Roberts bring back the 'one drop' rule of race determination? Norrrm Sunday #27
Easy peasy WestMichRad Sunday #28
If birthright citizenship is dropped Old Crank Sunday #12
As is plainly clear, "What then ?" is not a familiar question to this WH. Shoot first, ask questions later, think never. eppur_se_muova Sunday #13
Donald should prove that he is serious - and there is a way Dan Sunday #16
The Supreme Court fight does not threaten chaos. The administration's suit threatens chaos. Martin68 Sunday #18
Bureaucratic nightmare Mz Pip Sunday #23
Trump's perfect judge... Roland Freisler... original citizenship could be revoked Norrrm Sunday #29
'Alarm bells' ring as Trump resurrects racist arguments in major legal case: experts LetMyPeopleVote Yesterday #34
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court fight over ...»Reply #34